• Support PF! Buy your school textbooks, materials and every day products Here!

Real Analysis - Radius of Convergence

  • #1
159
0

Homework Statement


Suppose that [tex]\sum[/tex]anxn has finite radius of convergence R and that an >= 0 for all n. Show that if the series converges at R, then it also converges at -R.

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


Since the series converges at R, then I know that [tex]\sum[/tex]anRn = M.

At -R, the series is the following: [tex]\sum[/tex]an(-R)n = [tex]\sum[/tex](-1)nanRn.

I'm not sure where to go from here. I thought I needed to use the alternating series test, but how can I know that a1 >= a2 >= ... >= an for all n? Do I know this because the series converges? Thanks for your help.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Dick
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
26,258
618
Right. You can't use the alternating series test. How about a comparison test?
 
  • #3
159
0
Thanks! So since [tex]\sum[/tex]anRn converges, and an(-R)n <= anRn for all n, then [tex]\sum[/tex]an(-R)n converges.
 
  • #4
Dick
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
26,258
618
Sorry! That's wrong. I'm clearly asleep at the wheel. That's convergence for sequences. And this sort of argument only shows that the partial sums are bounded, not that they converge. Do you know the Dirichlet convergence test?
 
Last edited:
  • #5
159
0
Sorry! That's wrong. I'm clearly asleep at the wheel. That's convergence for sequences. And this sort of argument only shows that the partial sums are bounded, not that they converge. Do you know the Dirichlet convergence test?
I don't know that one. But the comparison test in my book says the following:

Let [tex]\sum[/tex]an be a series where an >=0 for all n.
(i) If [tex]\sum[/tex]an converges and |bn| <= an for all n, then [tex]\sum[/tex]bn converges.

If I let an = anRn, this is >=0 for all n. And if I let bn = an(-R)n, then I have |bn| <= an for all n, so the series converges, right? What's wrong with this statement?
 
  • #6
Dick
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
26,258
618
Nothing wrong with that. Unfortunately, I wasn't thinking of that comparison test. Hence the panic attack. Carry on.
 
  • #7
159
0
Ok! :smile: Thanks once again for your help.
 
  • #8
HallsofIvy
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
41,794
923
What's wrong with using the comparison test is that it only applies to positive series. Certainly -n< (1/2)n for all n, but we can't use that to conclude that [itex]\sum -n [/itex] converges!

The crucial point is that every an is positive. That means that [itex]\sum a_n x^n[/itex], for x negative is an alternating series. What is true of alternating series?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9
159
0
The crucial point is that every an is positive. That means that [itex]\sum a_n x^n[/itex], for x negative is an alternating series. What is true of alternating series?
If a1 >= a2 >= ... >= an >= ... >= 0 and lim(an) = 0, then the alternating series [tex]\sum[/tex](-1)nan converges. But, like I said before, do I know that a1 >= a2 >= ... >= an because the series converges at R?
 
  • #10
Dick
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
26,258
618
What's wrong with using the comparison test is that it only applies to positive series. Certainly -n< (1/2)n for all n, but we can't use that to conclude that [itex]\sum -n [/itex] converges!

The crucial point is that every an is positive. That means that [itex]\sum a_n x^n[/itex], for x negative is an alternating series. What is true of alternating series?
All of terms a_n*R^n are positive and it's convergent. The series is absolutely convergent. Nothing can go wrong here.
 

Related Threads for: Real Analysis - Radius of Convergence

Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
488
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Top