Show that Euler-Mascheroni sequence is decreasing &monotonic

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The Euler-Mascheroni sequence, defined as tn = 1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + ... + 1/n - ln(n), is proven to be decreasing and monotonic through the analysis of the difference tn - tn+1. The expression tn - tn+1 can be interpreted as the difference of areas, leading to the conclusion that tn - tn+1 > 0. By simplifying the logarithmic terms and considering integrals, it is established that the left side of the inequality, ln(1 + 1/n), is greater than the right side, 1/(n + 1), for n > 1, confirming the sequence's monotonicity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of logarithmic functions and properties
  • Basic knowledge of calculus, specifically integration
  • Familiarity with sequences and series in mathematical analysis
  • Concept of area under curves in relation to integrals
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the Euler-Mascheroni constant and its applications
  • Learn about the integral test for convergence of series
  • Explore advanced techniques in calculus, including the Mean Value Theorem
  • Investigate the relationship between harmonic series and logarithmic functions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and researchers interested in sequence analysis, calculus, and the properties of logarithmic functions will benefit from this discussion.

timnswede
Messages
100
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


tn=1+1/2+1/3+...+1/n - ln(n)
a.) Interpret tn - tn+1= [ln(n+1)-ln(n)] - 1/(n+1) as a difference of areas to show that tn - tn+1 > 0.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I have not started working on part b) yet, because so far I am stuck on part a). I just simplified a bit and got ln(1+1/n)>1/(n+1). Not sure how to prove that the left side is bigger than the right.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Did you consider an integral?
There are other methods, too, depending on the equations you got for the logarithm.
 
Is it as easy as just integrating both sides? I get xln(1+1/x)+ln(1+x)>ln(1+x). The left side is always greater since xln(1+1/x) is always greater than zero for n>1. Is that enough to prove it?
 
Integrate both sides with respect to what?

[ln(n+1)-ln(n)] looks like an integration result.
 
Woops those x's up there should be n's. But with dn. I can't see what integral would have resulted in [ln(n+1)-ln(n)] though. Integrating 1/n gets me ln(n), but integrating ln(n) does not get me ln(n+1).
 
timnswede said:
Integrating 1/n gets me ln(n)
If you integrate from where to where?
 
mfb said:
If you integrate from where to where?
From the beginning of the sequence, 1, to the end, n.
 
timnswede said:
From the beginning of the sequence, 1, to the end, n.
What if you integrate it from n to n+1?
Also can you think of the area of rectangle formed with height 1/(n+1) and width (n+1)-n? Just compare them on the graph of f(x)=1/x
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K