Proving Convergence of $\sum_{k=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{k \, (\log (k+1))^p}$

  • Thread starter Thread starter devious_
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Convergence
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The convergence of the series $\sum_{k=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{k \, (\log (k+1))^p}$ is established based on the value of p. The series converges for p > 1 and diverges for p ≤ 1. The integral test and the Cauchy-Condensation test are effective methods for proving these results. The integral test utilizes the property that $\log(k) < \log(k+1)$ to facilitate convergence analysis.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of series convergence tests, specifically the integral test and Cauchy-Condensation test.
  • Familiarity with logarithmic functions and their properties.
  • Knowledge of the Riemann p-series and its convergence criteria.
  • Basic calculus concepts related to limits and infinite series.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Cauchy-Condensation test in detail to understand its application in series convergence.
  • Learn about the Riemann p-series and its convergence behavior for different values of p.
  • Explore the integral test for convergence with various types of functions.
  • Investigate other convergence tests, such as the ratio test and root test, for broader applications.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying calculus or real analysis, and anyone interested in series convergence and advanced mathematical analysis.

devious_
Messages
312
Reaction score
3
Find all p \geq 0 such that

\sum_{k=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{k \, (\log (k+1))^p}

converges.

It looks like the integral test is the most likely candidate, but I haven't been able to make any progress using it. I'd appreciate a push in the right direction.

Edit:
I've managed to prove that it converges for p &gt; 1. Since it obviously diverges for p=0, I'm trying to see what happens when 0 &lt; p \leq 1.

Edit2:
And now I just proved that it diverges for such p. Problem solved. :smile:
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
out of curiosity, how did u proceed? I used a criterion that is very useful when dealing with log series. it says that \sum a_n converges \Leftrightarrow \sum 2^n a_{2^n} converges.

So compare the 2^n serie with the riemann p-serie and you get that the original series behaves just like the riemann p-serie, i.e. diverges for p \leq 1 and converges for p>1.
 
Last edited:
How on Earth does that test work?

take the sum of (-1)^n/log(n), that converges by the alternating series test, yet the 2^n subseries

2^n(-1)^(2^n)/log(2^n) = 2^n/nlog(2)

does not converge.
 
Oh yeah, an must be decreasing non-negative.
 
I was just about to add "non-increasing".

For the problem here, you can also use the integral test.
 
I used the fact that log is increasing so that \log (k) &lt; \log (k+1), and I used the integral test.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K