Proving Divergence of Sum of Fractions

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the divergence of the series \(\sum \frac{a_n}{1+a_n}\) given that \(\sum a_n\) diverges, where \(a_n > 0\). Participants are exploring the implications of this problem within the context of series convergence and divergence.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants question the clarity of the problem statement, noting that \(s_n\) is not defined in the context of the first part. Others express confusion about the relationship between the convergence of the two series and whether the original poster intended to show divergence or convergence.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights and clarifications regarding the assumptions of the problem. Some have offered sketches of potential proofs and reasoning, while others have raised questions about specific arguments and their validity. There is no explicit consensus on the best approach yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating potential typos and clarifying the conditions under which the series diverge or converge. There is mention of homework constraints and the need for precise definitions in mathematical proofs.

ehrenfest
Messages
2,001
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Suppose a_n > 0, s_n =a_1 + ... + a_n, and \sum a_n diverges,

a) Prove that

\sum \frac{a_n}{1+a_n}

diverges.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


Comparison with a_n fails miserably.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
is there a typo? i haven't thought about the problem yet but i notice s_n is nowhere in the problem
 
ircdan said:
is there a typo? i haven't thought about the problem yet but i notice s_n is nowhere in the problem

it is in part b which I have not posted (yet).
 
ehrenfest said:
it is in part b which I have not posted (yet).

ok cool
 
there must be a mistake. if \sum a_i diverges then you cannot prove that \sum \frac{a_n}{1+a_n} converges. are you to show that the second series diverges? or is the first series supposed to converge?
 
Grr. I am two for two today. I am supposed to prove the second series diverges. Sorry. I checked that like three times. I don't know what is wrong with me.

Anyone know why the edit button is missing from my opening post and in fact my second post above also?
 
Last edited:
ehrenfest said:
Anyone know why the edit button is missing from my opening post and in fact my second post above also?

You can only edit 30 minutes after you post.
 
The edit post button disappears within 24hrs.

I will do the edit to correct the initial post.
 
Integral said:
The edit post button disappears within 24hrs.

I began this thread less than 8 hours ago as you can see from the time stamps.

Is it 24 hours or 30 minutes? I remember it definitely used to be longer than 30 minutes. If that has changed I would recommend changing it back.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
ahh typo, no wonder!

recall from rudin, sum(a_k) converges iff for all e > 0 there is N s.t. for all m > n > N |sum(a_k, k = n, ..., m)| < e

i'll be extra terse on purpose because this is a good problem, made me think

a_k > 0 by hypothesis(this is used in the proof of course)
claim sum(a_k/(1 + a_k)) converges => sum(a_k) converges

"proof sketch"
since sum(a_k/(1 + a_k)) converges, there is a number 0 < p < 1 and an integer N such that for all k > N, a_k < p.

we can pick an M s.t. for all m > n > M,

|sum(a_k, k = n, ..., m)| = |a_n + ... + a_m| = |(1 + a_n)a_n/(1 + a_n) + ... + (1 + a_m)a_m/(1 + a_m)| < (1 + p)|a_n/(1 + a_n) + ... + a_m/(1 + a_m)| < and now it's obviousgoodluck!
 
Last edited:
  • #11
ehrenfest said:
I began this thread less than 8 hours ago as you can see from the time stamps.

Is it 24 hours or 30 minutes? I remember it definitely used to be longer than 30 minutes. If that has changed I would recommend changing it back.

The time was changed recently due to users abusing the function. See the following thread.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=229578
 
  • #12
ircdan said:
ahh typo, no wonder!

recall from rudin, sum(a_k) converges iff for all e > 0 there is N s.t. for all m > n > N |sum(a_k, k = n, ..., m)| < e

i'll be extra terse on purpose because this is a good problem, made me think

a_k > 0 by hypothesis(this is used in the proof of course)
claim sum(a_k/(1 + a_k)) converges => sum(a_k) converges

"proof sketch"
since sum(a_k/(1 + a_k)) converges, there is a number 0 < p < 1 and an integer N such that for all k > N, a_k < p.

we can pick an M s.t. for all m > n > M,

|sum(a_k, k = n, ..., m)| = |a_n + ... + a_m| = |(1 + a_n)a_n/(1 + a_n) + ... + (1 + a_m)a_m/(1 + a_m)| < (1 + p)|a_n/(1 + a_n) + ... + a_m/(1 + a_m)| < and now it's obviousgoodluck!

I do not know how you are getting your p but I understand your idea. Here is a complete proof.

If the series \sum \frac{a_n}{1+a_n} converges, then a_n must be bounded. Otherwise, given any \epsilon&gt;0[/tex] and natural number N, I could find n \geq N so that \frac{a_n}{1+a_n} is between 1-\epsilon and \epsilon. So, the terms of that series would not go to 0. So, let B bound a_n. <br /> <br /> Then fix \epsilon \geq 0. Use the assumed convergence of \sum \frac{a_n}{1+a_n} and the Cauchy criterion to find N so large that n,m \geq N implies that \sum_{k=n}^m \frac{a_k}{1+a_k} \leq \epsilon/(1+B). Then we have that \sum_{k=n}^m a_k = \sum_{k=n}^m a_k (1+a_k)/(1+a_k) \leq (1+B) \sum_{k=n}^m a_k/(1+a_k) &amp;lt; \epsilon<br /> <br /> So convergence of the second series implies convergence of the first.<br /> <br /> Please confirm that this is correct.
 
  • #13
i don't understand your argument for bounding a_n, this doesn't mean it's wrong though
everything else makes sense to me

i did this, sum(a_k/(1 + a_k)) converges, so lim a_k/(1 + a_k) = 0, so there is an N s.t. for all k > N, a_k/(1 + a_k) < 1/2, so a_k < 1/2(1 + a_k) = 1/2 + a_k/2, so a_k/2 < 1/2, ie, a_k < 1 for all k > N, so that's enough, the whole p thing is just because this implies there is a 0 < p < 1 s.t. a_k < p for all k > N(sometimes this is very useful so I just pulled it out incase I would need it later), but yea it's not needed, all you need is a bound
 
Last edited:
  • #14
ircdan said:
i don't understand your argument for bounding a_n, this doesn't mean it's wrong though
everything else makes sense to me

In short, I was just saying that if we assume \sum \frac{a_n}{a_n+1} converges then \frac{a_n}{a_n+1} must go to zero and then its pretty clear that a_n must be bounded. Does that make sense? There are lots of ways to show that formally. Yes, all we need is a bound and we are just confusing each other getting a bound in different ways. :) Problem solved.
 
  • #15
part d:

What can be said about

\sum \frac{a_n}{1+n a_n}

and

\sum \frac{a_n}{1+n^2 a_n}
.

When a_n = 1, the first one converges and the second one diverges. I cannot prove that that always happens though.
 
  • #16
ehrenfest said:
part d:

What can be said about

\sum \frac{a_n}{1+n a_n}

and

\sum \frac{a_n}{1+n^2 a_n}
.

When a_n = 1, the first one converges and the second one diverges. I cannot prove that that always happens though.

i'm not sure what you mean about a_n = 1, if this is the case then sum(a_n) = sum(1) diverges and so the does the first one i think since it becomes sum(1/(1 + n))some observations, assuming a_n > 0 always I take it
if sum(a_n) converges, then they both converge by comparison since |a_n/(1 + na_n)| <= |a_n| and |a_n/(1 + n^2a_n| <= |a_n|for the first, note if a_n = 1/n, then the first and sum(a_n) both diverge, if a_n = 1/n^2 then sum(a_n) and the first both converge, so my gut feeling is that for the first, we have a sum(a_n) converges iff the first converges situationfor the second, things don't look as nice, note setting a_n = 1/n^2 then sum(a_n) and the second both converge. on the other hand, setting a_n = 1/n, we have that sum(a_n) diverges yet the second converges! so I think you can't say too much here, i'd look at more examplesi'd focus on the first and try to prove that if it converges, then so does sum(a_n), I think it's true but don't have time to work on it atm
 
Last edited:
  • #17
ircdan said:
i'm not sure what you mean about a_n = 1, if this is the case then sum(a_n) = sum(1) diverges and so the does the first one i think since it becomes sum(1/(1 + n))

Sorry, I meant that the first one diverges and the second one converges. Sorry.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
2K