Proving Convergence: Solving the Limit of 1/(6n^2+1) = 0

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Mr Davis 97
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Convergence Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around proving the limit of the sequence defined by ##\frac{1}{6n^2+1}## as ##n## approaches infinity, specifically showing that this limit equals zero. Participants explore various approaches to establish convergence, including the use of epsilon-delta definitions and comparisons with other sequences.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant attempts to find an appropriate ##N## such that ##\frac{1}{6n^2+1} < \epsilon##, but expresses confusion regarding the condition that ##\epsilon > 1##.
  • Another participant corrects the first by stating that to maintain the inequality, ##\epsilon## must be less than 1.
  • Some participants suggest using alternative forms, such as ##\frac{1}{6n^2}##, to demonstrate convergence, arguing that this comparison is valid since ##\frac{1}{6n^2+1} < \frac{1}{6n^2}## for all ##n##.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of inequalities in convergence, with one participant questioning if the convergence of a sequence ##b_n## implies the convergence of another sequence ##a_n## that is always greater than or equal to it.
  • Another participant challenges the reasoning behind this implication by providing a counterexample with specific sequences.
  • A later reply elaborates on the epsilon-delta definition of limits, emphasizing the importance of the choice of ##N## in relation to the radius ##r## around the limit.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conditions necessary for establishing convergence, particularly regarding the implications of inequalities and the choice of sequences for comparison. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives on the approach to proving the limit.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the importance of correctly applying the epsilon-delta definition and the need for careful handling of inequalities, but specific mathematical steps and assumptions remain unresolved.

Mr Davis 97
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
44
I am trying to show that ##\displaystyle \lim \frac{1}{6n^2+1}=0##.

First, we have to find an N such that, given an ##\epsilon > 0##, we have that ##\frac{1}{6n^2+1} < \epsilon##. But in finding such an N, I get the inequality ##n> \sqrt{\frac{1}{6}(\frac{1}{\epsilon}-1)}##. But clearly with the square root we would have to have that ##\epsilon>1##, which doesn't make any sense since epsilon can be any positive real number. What am I doing wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You got that wrong. To keep 1/ε -1 > 0, you need ε < 1.
 
You can be very generous here. You could e.g. take as well ##\varepsilon^3## and ##n^3 > 6n^2 +1##. Maybe at the end there will be a maximum somewhere, as ##2^3 \ngtr 6\cdot 2^2 +1## and the starting point is say ##N > 20##, but any estimates can be generous.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: FactChecker
fresh_42 said:
You can be very generous here. You could e.g. take as well ##\varepsilon^3## and ##n^3 > 6n^2 +1##. Maybe at the end there will be a maximum somewhere, as ##2^3 \ngtr 6\cdot 2^2 +1## and the starting point is say ##N > 20##, but any estimates can be generous.
So I could use ##\frac{1}{6n^2}## just as well as ##\frac{1}{6n^2+1}## to prove convergence, since ##\forall n \in \mathbb{N} \frac{1}{6n^2+1} < \frac{1}{6n^2}##?
 
You have to prove ##\frac{1}{6n^2+1} < ... < \varepsilon## for all ##n > N=N(\varepsilon)##. The inequalities don't have to be close, only true. So ##\frac{1}{6n^2+1} < \frac{1}{6n^2}## as a first step is allowed.
 
fresh_42 said:
You have to prove ##\frac{1}{6n^2+1} < ... < \varepsilon## for all ##n > N=N(\varepsilon)##. The inequalities don't have to be close, only true. So ##\frac{1}{6n^2+1} < \frac{1}{6n^2}## as a first step is allowed.
So in general, if ##\forall n \in \mathbb{N} ~ a_n \ge b_n## and ##b_n## converges, then ##a_n## converges?
 
Mr Davis 97 said:
So in general, if ##\forall n \in \mathbb{N} ~ a_n \ge b_n## and ##b_n## converges, then ##a_n## converges?
Why that? Simply take ##a_n=n## and ##b_n=1##.
 
Mr Davis 97 said:
So in general, if ##\forall n \in \mathbb{N} ~ a_n \ge b_n## and ##b_n## converges, then ##a_n## converges?
You are being a little careless with your inequalities. You should say "and an converges, than bn converges"
 
The idea is, that whatever one chooses for a radius ##r## of an open ball or interval around the limit, there will always be the rest of all sequence members within it, i.e. all up to finitely many (which are allowed to be outside). The members ##a_1 ,\ldots , a_N## are allowed outside, the members ##a_{N+1},\ldots ## all must be inside. The only thing is, that this radius here is called ##r=\varepsilon##. And of course the choice of ##N## depends on how small the ball / interval is; which is why I prefer to write ##N(\varepsilon)## instead. It reminds me on this fact.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K