Does the Sequence an = np / en Converge or Diverge?

  • Thread starter Thread starter icesalmon
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sequence
icesalmon
Messages
270
Reaction score
13

Homework Statement


Determine the convergence or divergence of an = np / en


The Attempt at a Solution


Using L'Hopitals Rule, I get (p(nP-1en) - nPen) / e2n which, if I take the limit as n \rightarrow\infty I still get \infty/\infty which doesn't help. I can see if a sequence converges to 0, I'm not sure how to show that it does, in general other than taking the limit or using L'Hopital.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For one thing that's not l'Hopital, that's the quotient rule. l'Hopital isn't that. For a second thing I don't think l'Hopital is very helpful anyway. Why don't you take the log of your sequence and try to show the log approaches -infinity. That would show the sequence approaches 0, right?
 
The form of the sequence is primed for use of the ratio test - if we show the limit of the ratios of consecutive terms is less than 1, then this sequence is eventually smaller than a geometric sequence whose ratio is less than 1, so...
 
Dick said:
For one thing that's not l'Hopital, that's the quotient rule. l'Hopital isn't that. For a second thing I don't think l'Hopital is very helpful anyway. Why don't you take the log of your sequence and try to show the log approaches -infinity. That would show the sequence approaches 0, right?
This is true, I made the mistake of using quotient rule when I meant to apply L'Hopital. I knew it would happen sooner or later :blushing:. Well, it seems so. Again, thanks.
 
Gib Z said:
The form of the sequence is primed for use of the ratio test - if we show the limit of the ratios of consecutive terms is less than 1, then this sequence is eventually smaller than a geometric sequence whose ratio is less than 1, so...
Gib Z, thank you for your reply. Although I would love to use the ratio test, it so happens that I just haven't gone that far into the chapter to know how to use the ratio test. Coming attractions I suppose :-p thanks for the insight!
 
icesalmon said:
This is true, I made the mistake of using quotient rule when I meant to apply L'Hopital. I knew it would happen sooner or later :blushing:. Well, it seems so. Again, thanks.

Did you try showing log(n^p/e^n) approaches -infinity? Use that log(n)/n approaches 0. You can prove that with l'Hopital.
 
an = pn/en
ln(an) = nln(p)/nln(e) [lne = 1 so I'm going to just write n here]
ln(an) = nln(p)/n
ln(an) = ln(p)
lim[n -> \infty ]ln(an) = lim[n -> \infty ](ln(p))

my problem, something I'm not seeing or something I have messed up, is that my term on the right * ln(p) * does nothing when I take the limit [ n -> \infty ]
 
icesalmon said:
an = pn/en
ln(an) = nln(p)/nln(e) [lne = 1 so I'm going to just write n here]
ln(an) = nln(p)/n
ln(an) = ln(p)
lim[n -> \infty ]ln(an) = lim[n -> \infty ](ln(p))

my problem, something I'm not seeing or something I have messed up, is that my term on the right * ln(p) * does nothing when I take the limit [ n -> \infty ]

log(a/b) isn't log(a)/log(b). It's log(a)-log(b).
 
okay, so I have
{an} = np/en, p > 0
ln{an} = pln(n) - n p > 0
lim[n -> \infty]{an} = lim[n -> \infty]pln(n) - lim[n -> \infty] n p > 0
lim[n -> \infty]{an} = lim[n -> \infty]pln(n) - \infty p > 0
i'm sorry, I'm really not seeing where this is going. I was thinking of working backwards once I showed {an} converged to 0.
 
  • #10
icesalmon said:
okay, so I have
{an} = np/en, p > 0
ln{an} = pln(n) - n p > 0
lim[n -> \infty]{an} = lim[n -> \infty]pln(n) - lim[n -> \infty] n p > 0
lim[n -> \infty]{an} = lim[n -> \infty]pln(n) - \infty p > 0
i'm sorry, I'm really not seeing where this is going. I was thinking of working backwards once I showed {an} converged to 0.

Write p*log(n)-n as n*(p*log(n)/n-1). As n->infinity how does log(n)/n behave?
 
  • #11
I believe it converges to zero.
 
  • #12
icesalmon said:
I believe it converges to zero.

Use l'Hopital to show it does.
 
Back
Top