Show Convergence of Contractive Sequence Homework

  • Thread starter Thread starter bonfire09
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sequence
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around demonstrating the convergence of a sequence defined recursively as ##x_n=\frac{1}{2}(x_{n-2}+x_{n-1})## for ##n > 2##, starting from arbitrary real numbers ##x_1 < x_2##. The problem is situated within the context of contractive sequences and Cauchy sequences.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the properties of the sequence, questioning its monotonicity and considering the application of contraction principles. Some suggest using induction to establish properties of the sequence, while others propose proving it as a Cauchy sequence. There are discussions about bounding differences between terms and the implications of those bounds for convergence.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants sharing various insights and approaches. Some have offered guidance on how to structure proofs and consider different aspects of the sequence's behavior, while others express uncertainty about their progress and seek clarification on specific points.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the challenge of showing that the sequence is contractive and the implications of bounding differences between terms. There is also mention of the need for clarity regarding the convergence of certain expressions and the importance of ensuring that the sequence converges to zero in the context of the Cauchy criterion.

bonfire09
Messages
247
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


If ##x_1 < x_2## are arbitrary real numbers and ##x_n=\frac{1}{2}(x_{n-2}+x_{n-1})## for## n > 2##, show that ##(x_n)## is convergent.

Homework Equations



Definition of Contractive Sequence: We say that a sequence ##X=(x_n)## of real numbers is contractive if there exists a constant ##C##; ##0 < C < 1##, such that ##|x_{n+2}-x_{n+1}|\leq C|x_{n+1}-x_{n}|## for all ##n\in\mathbb{N}##. The number ##C## is called the constant of the contractive sequence.

The Attempt at a Solution


I know this sequence is not monotone so I think I need to use contraction. All I have is that ## |x_{n+2}-x_{n+1}|=| \frac{1}{2}(x_{n}+x_{n+1}-\frac{1}{2}(x_{n-1}+x_n|=|\frac{1}{2}x_{n+1}-\frac{1}{2}x_{n-1}|## and ##|x_{n+1}-x_n|=|\frac{1}{2}(x_{n-1}+x_n)-\frac{1}{2}(x_{n-2}+x_{n-1}|=\frac{1}{2}|x_n-x_{n-2}|##. But I can't seem to show that ##\frac{1}{2}|x_{n+1}-x_n|\leq \frac{1}{2}|x_n-x_{n-2}|## which I think is not possible but I am not sure. I think cauchy might work too but not sure how to apply it here.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You've show that |##x_{n+2} -x_{n+1}##| = 1/2|##x_{n+1} -x_{n-1}##| and you wish that last ##x_{n-1}## were ##x_{n}## because then you would have it. I messed around with that a bit and didn't immediately see anything too promising.

I think I would try induction. Show it's true for n =2. Then see if you can do an induction step.
 
I think I might have to prove that it is a Cauchy Sequence instead. So what I would have is then for scratchwork is that there exists a ##h\in\mathbb{N}## such that if ##n>m## and ##n,m \geq h## then ##|x_n-x_m|=|\frac{1}{2}x_{n-2}+\frac{1}{2}x_{n-1}-\frac{1}{2}x_{m-2}+\frac{1}{2}x_{m-1}|##. But from here I don't know what to do.
 
bonfire09 said:
I think I might have to prove that it is a Cauchy Sequence instead. So what I would have is then for scratchwork is that there exists a ##h\in\mathbb{N}## such that if ##n>m## and ##n,m \geq h## then ##|x_n-x_m|=|\frac{1}{2}x_{n-2}+\frac{1}{2}x_{n-1}-\frac{1}{2}x_{m-2}+\frac{1}{2}x_{m-1}|##. But from here I don't know what to do.

Start with a numerical example to try to see what to do in the general case. Suppose x0=0 and x1=1. So |x1-x0|=1. x2=1/2, so |x2-x1|=1/2. x3=3/4, so |x4-x3|=1/4. Etc etc. Now see if you can figure out what going on and generalize that. And I think you have a typo in your problem statement. You mean ##x_n=\frac{1}{2}(x_{n-2}+x_{n-1})##, right? The induction brmath suggests might be helpful.
 
Well this problem is located in the Cauchy Sequence section and I am think this sequence does look Cauchy to me. I'm thinking if I can somehow bound ##|x_n-x_m|## by ##\frac{1}{2^{n-1}}## because of the ##\frac{1}{2}## then I would have it since ##\frac{1}{2^{n-1}}## is convergent. Oh yeah thanks I fixed the problem.
 
bonfire09 said:
Well this problem is located in the Cauchy Sequence section and I am think this sequence does look Cauchy to me. I'm thinking if I can somehow bound ##|x_n-x_m|## by ##\frac{1}{2^{n-1}}## because of the ##\frac{1}{2}## then I would have it since ##\frac{1}{2^{n-1}}## is convergent. Oh yeah thanks I fixed the problem.

Yes, and an extension of that argument would show any contractive sequence is Cauchy and hence convergent, right?
 
Yes but I doubt I can get anywhere with it proving its contractive. I think I am stuck pretty badly.
 
bonfire09 said:
Yes but I doubt I can get anywhere with it proving its contractive. I think I am stuck pretty badly.

I thought from your last comment in post 5 that you had the solution. What's bugging you? How far did you get?
 
The bounding part. Showing that ##|x_n-x_m|= |(\frac{1}{2}x_{n-2}+\frac{1}{2}x_{n-1})-(\frac{1}{2}x_{m-2}+\frac{1}{2}x_{m-1})|\leq \frac{1}{2^{n-1}}##.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
bonfire09 said:
The bounding part. Showing that ##|x_n-x_m|= |(\frac{1}{2}x_{n-2}+\frac{1}{2}x_{n-1})-(\frac{1}{2}x_{m-2}+\frac{1}{2}x_{m-1})|\leq \frac{1}{2^{n-1}}##.

It's not. The difference |xn-xm| is dependent on what x0 and x1 are. If |x1-x0|=C can you show |x2-x1|=C/2? Extend that. It's going to boil down to a geometric series argument to show it's Cauchy.
 
  • #11
Ahh ok I will try to take it from here and post what I get when I am finished.
 
  • #12
If ##|x_2-x_1|=c## and ##x_1<x_2##. Then ##x_3=\frac{1}{2}(x_1+x_2)##. It follows ##\frac{1}{2}|x_3-x_2|=\frac{c}{2}##. So I from here what I see is that if ##|x_1-x_2|=c## then ##|(x_1-x_2)+(x_2-x_3)+...+(x_{n-1}-x_n)|\leq |x_1-x_2|+|x_2-x_3|+...+|x_{n-1}-x_n|= c+\frac{1}{2}c+...+\frac{1}{2^{n-1}}c=2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})## which I know that ##2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})## converges. I hope I got this part right. And for the first part I think I can use induction to prove it.

Proof:
 
Last edited:
  • #13
bonfire09 said:
If ##|x_2-x_1|=c## and ##x_1<x_2##. Then ##x_3=\frac{1}{2}(x_1+x_2)##. It follows ##\frac{1}{2}|x_3-x_2|=\frac{c}{2}##. So I from here what I see is that if ##|x_1-x_2|=c## then ##|(x_1-x_2)+(x_2-x_3)+...+(x_{n-1}-x_n)|\leq |x_1-x_2|+|x_2-x_3|+...+|x_{n-1}-x_n|= c+\frac{1}{2}c+...+\frac{1}{2^{n-1}}c=2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})## which I know that ##2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})## converges. I hope I got this part right. And for the first part I think I can use induction to prove it.

Proving it's Cauchy means you want to show |xn-xm| can be made small by making n and m large. An estimate of |x1-xn| won't help with that. Don't start from x1.
 
  • #14
Proof:
This is what I have so far.
Let ##\epsilon>0## and let ##h\in\mathbb{N}## such that if ##m,n \geq h## and ##m>n## then ##|x_m-x_n|=|(x_m-x_{m-1})+(x_{m-1}-x_{m-2})+...+(x_{n-1}-x_n)| \leq |x_m-x_{m-1}|+...+|x_{n-1}-x_n|##. Suppose ##|x_m-x_{m-1}|=c##. It follows from my previous statement that ##|x_m-x_{m-1}|+...+|x_{n-1}-x_n|=c+\frac{c}{2}+...+\frac{c}{2^{n-1}}=2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})<\epsilon## since we know ##2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})## converges. I think this might be right maybe my indexes are off. Not sure.
 
  • #15
bonfire09 said:
Proof:
This is what I have so far.
Let ##\epsilon>0## and let ##h\in\mathbb{N}## such that if ##m,n \geq h## and ##m>n## then ##|x_m-x_n|=|(x_m-x_{m-1})+(x_{m-1}-x_{m-2})+...+(x_{n-1}-x_n)| \leq |x_m-x_{m-1}|+...+|x_{n-1}-x_n|##. Suppose ##|x_m-x_{m-1}|=c##. It follows from my previous statement that ##|x_m-x_{m-1}|+...+|x_{n-1}-x_n|=c+\frac{c}{2}+...+\frac{c}{2^{n-1}}=2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})<\epsilon## since we know ##2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})## converges. I think this might be right maybe my indexes are off. Not sure.

I didn't check the details of the indices yet. The problem with showing that that is less than ε is that ##2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})## converges alright, but it doesn't converge to 0. Think about it a bit.
 
  • #16
Oh yeah it converges to ##2c## and we need something that converges to ##0## since ##\epsilon## is arbitrary. But I don't think there is another sequence bigger than ##2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})## that converges to 0 because if it did then some of the terms of that sequence would be smaller than ##2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})##. Oh could I just do this ##2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})=(2c-\frac{2c}{2^n})=\frac{1}{2^n}(2c*2^n-2c)## and since ##\frac{1}{2^n}## converges to 0 the whole thing must converge to 0.
 
Last edited:
  • #17
bonfire09 said:
Oh yeah it converges to ##2c## and we need something that converges to ##0## since ##\epsilon## is arbitrary. But I don't think there is another sequence bigger than ##2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})## that converges to 0 because if it did then some of the terms of that sequence would be smaller than ##2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})##. Oh could I just do this ##2c(1-\frac{1}{2^n})=(2c-\frac{2c}{2^n})=\frac{1}{2^n}(2c*2^n-2c)## and since ##\frac{1}{2^n}## converges to 0 the whole thing must converge to 0.

No, no. Define c=|x2-x1| once and for all. What's |x3-x2|? What's ##|x_m-x_{m-1}|##? Remember that inductive proof you were going to do?
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K