MHB Radius of Convergence for $\sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \frac{z^{2j}}{2^j}$

Click For Summary
The radius of convergence for the series $\sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \frac{z^{2j}}{2^j}$ is determined to be $\sqrt{2}$. By substituting $z^2 = x$, the series can be analyzed using the ratio test, yielding a radius of convergence of 2 for $x$. The transformation shows that the series behaves like a geometric series, converging for $|z| < \sqrt{2}$. The Cauchy root test further confirms this result, indicating that the series converges under the condition $|z| < \sqrt{2}$. Thus, the original series has a radius of convergence of $\sqrt{2}$.
Guest2
Messages
192
Reaction score
0
Radius of convergence of $\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \frac{z^{2j}}{2^j}$.

If I let $z^2 = x$ I get a series whose radius of convergence is $2$ (by the ratio test).

How do I get from this that the original series has a radius of convergence equal to $\sqrt{2}$?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
$$\dfrac{z^{2j}}{2^j}=\left(\dfrac{z}{\sqrt2}\right)^{2j}$$, so the series is a geometric series which converges for all $$|z|<\sqrt2$$.
 
Thank you.

Cauchy root test gives: $\displaystyle (\lim |a_n|^{1/n})^{-1} =\left(\lim \left|\frac{x^{2n}}{2^n}\right|^{1/n}\right)^{-1} = \lim \left|\frac{x^2}{2}\right| = \frac{1}{2} |x|$ and $\displaystyle \frac{1}{2} |x^2| < 1 \implies |x| < \sqrt{2}. $ So $R = \sqrt{2}$

However, my book says $R = (\lim |a_n|^{1/n})^{-1})$ (if it exists). Surely, that can't be right as I still have $x$ term in the limit?
 
greg1313 said:
$$\dfrac{z^{2j}}{2^j}=\left(\dfrac{z}{\sqrt2}\right)^{2j}$$, so the series is a geometric series which converges for all $$|z|<\sqrt2$$.

Technically it would need to be written as $\displaystyle \begin{align*} \left( \frac{z^2}{2} \right) ^j \end{align*}$ to be read off as a geometric series. So it converges where the absolute value of the common ratio $\displaystyle \begin{align*} \left| \frac{z^2}{2} \right| < 1 \implies \left| z^2 \right| < 2 \implies \left| z \right| < \sqrt{2} \end{align*}$...
 
There are probably loads of proofs of this online, but I do not want to cheat. Here is my attempt: Convexity says that $$f(\lambda a + (1-\lambda)b) \leq \lambda f(a) + (1-\lambda) f(b)$$ $$f(b + \lambda(a-b)) \leq f(b) + \lambda (f(a) - f(b))$$ We know from the intermediate value theorem that there exists a ##c \in (b,a)## such that $$\frac{f(a) - f(b)}{a-b} = f'(c).$$ Hence $$f(b + \lambda(a-b)) \leq f(b) + \lambda (a - b) f'(c))$$ $$\frac{f(b + \lambda(a-b)) - f(b)}{\lambda(a-b)}...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K