Quick convergent series question.

  • Thread starter Thread starter binbagsss
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Convergent Series
binbagsss
Messages
1,291
Reaction score
12
2^n + n!/4^n ?
so by the 'vanishing condition' as n!/4^n does not ---> 0 as n --> infinity, this part of the series diverges.
however (e.g via the ratio test 2^n/4^n converges).
My book concludes that due to part a, the entire series divegres. However I am struggling to see how this justifies that the whole series will diverge - I thought that if part of a series diverges and part diverges , than what the whole series does depends upon the exact convergence and divergence - i.e could diverge or converge?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The whole series will diverge by comparison

n!/4^n<(2^n + n!)/4^n

If the parts were of opposite sign there would be the possibility of convergence.
 
binbagsss said:
2^n + n!/4^n ?
so by the 'vanishing condition' as n!/4^n does not ---> 0 as n --> infinity, this part of the series diverges.
however (e.g via the ratio test 2^n/4^n converges).
My book concludes that due to part a, the entire series divegres. However I am struggling to see how this justifies that the whole series will diverge - I thought that if part of a series diverges and part diverges , than what the whole series does depends upon the exact convergence and divergence - i.e could diverge or converge?

Looking at what you wrote, which is
2^n + \frac{n!}{4^n},
we have, of course, that both parts diverge. However, assuming you meant
\frac{2^n + n!}{4^n},
which, for some reason you did not want to write as (2^n + n!)/4^n, then you are correct: one "part" converges and the other diverges. However, that *automatically* means that the total diverges. Suppose we have two parts are ##t_1(n)## and ##t_2(n)## and that##\sum t_1(n)## converges while ##\sum t_2(n)## diverges. We have, for finite N:
S(N) = \sum_{n=1}^N (t_1(n) + t_2(n)) = S_1(N) + S_2(N), where the ##S_i(N)## are the partial sums, and our assumptions are that
\lim_{N \to \infty} S_1(N) = s_1 exists and is finite, while
\lim_{N \to \infty} S_2(N) does not exist (that is, it is either ##\pm \infty## or else does not exist at all, due to oscillations, etc). These two statements imply that S(N) does not have a finite limit as N → ∞, so the total series diverges.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top