Proving a convergent sequence is bounded

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the proof that a convergent sequence is bounded, specifically examining the conditions under which a certain bound \( M \) can be defined. Participants explore the implications of the limit of the sequence and the nature of the bounds involved.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Participant C.barker questions whether the bound \( M \) should be a natural number or a real number, seeking clarification on the nature of \( M \).
  • Another participant asserts that \( M \) can be any real number, suggesting flexibility in the definition of bounds.
  • A summary post reiterates the proof structure, emphasizing the relationship between the terms of the sequence and the limit, while also noting the finite nature of terms outside a certain range.
  • A later reply highlights that there are finitely many terms not within a specified \( \epsilon \) of the limit and infinitely many terms that are, indicating a distinction in behavior of the sequence as it converges.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of the bound \( M \), with some asserting it can be any real number while others question the implications of this on the proof. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specific nature of \( M \>.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions of bounds and the implications of the limit on the sequence's behavior. The discussion also reflects varying interpretations of the proof structure.

cbarker1
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
345
Reaction score
23
TL;DR
Suppose \[math]b_n\[math] is in \[math]\mathbb{R}\[math] such that \[math]lim b_n=2\[math]. Proving the sequence is bounded.
Dear Everybody,

I have a quick question about the \[math]M\[math] in this proof:

Suppose \[math]b_n\[math] is in \[math]\mathbb{R}\[math] such that \[math]lim b_n=3\[math]. Then, there is an \[math] N\in \mathbb{N}\[math] such that for all \[math]n\geq\[math], we have \[math]|b_n-3|<1\[math]. Let M1=4 and note that for n\geq N, we have
|b_n|=|b_n-3+3|\leq |b_n-3|+|3|<1+3=M1. The set A= {|b_1|,|b_2|,...|b_{N-1}| is a finite set and hence let M2=max{A}. Then Let M=max{B1,B2}. Then for all n in N we have |b_n|\leq B.

Should M be a natural number or a real number? If real, why?

Thanks
C.barker[/math][/math][/math][/math][/math][/math][/math][/math][/math][/math][/math][/math][/math][/math]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It can be any real number.
 
cbarker1 said:
Summary: Suppose \[math]b_n\[math] is in \[math]\mathbb{R}\[math] such that \[math]lim b_n=2\[math]. Proving the sequence is bounded.

Suppose \(\displaystyle b_n\(\displaystyle is in \(\displaystyle \mathbb{R}\(\displaystyle such that \(\displaystyle lim b_n=3\(\displaystyle . Then, there is an \(\displaystyle N\in \mathbb{N}\(\displaystyle such that for all \(\displaystyle n\geq\(\displaystyle , we have \(\displaystyle |b_n-3|<1\(\displaystyle . Let M1=4 and note that for n\geq N, we have
|b_n|=|b_n-3+3|\leq |b_n-3|+|3|<1+3=M1. The set A= {|b_1|,|b_2|,...|b_{N-1}| is a finite set and hence let M2=max{A}. Then Let M=max{B1,B2}. Then for all n in N we have |b_n|\leq B.
[/math][/math][/math][/math][/math][/math]
@cbarker1, one of your LaTeX is displaying properly. Take a look at our LaTeX guide. The link is in the lower left corner of the text entry pane.
 
Last edited:
Ultimately, you have finitely many terms $$a_n$$ that are not within a fixed $$\epsilon$$ of the limit $$L$$, and infinitely many within $$(L-\epsilon, L+ \epsilon)$$.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K