# Show that the following series converges

• SqueeSpleen
In summary, the given series converges for all real numbers x with absolute value less than 1/2. For x=1/2, the sequence converges to 1/e, so the series cannot be convergent. For x=-1/2, the sequence inside the series has the same absolute value as the previous one, and the general term approaches 1/e. This suggests that the series may converge, but a concise proof has not been found. It is known that if an oscillating series has a convergent associated sequence with a good rate of convergence, then the series also converges. However, it is unclear whether a good rate of convergence is necessary for the series to converge. It is also unknown if there exists
SqueeSpleen

## Homework Statement

The original problem was to find for which real numbers the series
$$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} 2^{n} .\left( \dfrac{ n }{ n+1 } \right)^{n} x^{n}$$
converges.
I used root criterion, it gave me a radius of convergence equal to 1/2. For x=1/2, I showed that the sequence converges to 1/e, so the series cannot be convergent. For x=-1/2 I think it's convergent but were unable to find a concise way to prove it.

## Homework Equations

None really, not that I can think off. Well, I have the following expression that I don't think it can be simplified. This is what I got when I summed the nth and (n+1)th terms.
$$- \left( \dfrac{n}{n+1} \right)^{n}+ \left( \dfrac{ n+1 }{ n+2 } \right) ^{n+1}$$

## The Attempt at a Solution

For x=-1/2 the sequence inside the series has the same absolute value than the previous one, so in absolute value the general term approaches 1/e. I think it converges, but I'm not sure how to prove it. The expression that I found trying to group the first term with the second one, the third one with the fourth one and so, is horrible and I don't think I can work with it.
I'm sure that it's easy to prove that if an oscillating series has an associated sequence that converges to a number, and the rate of convergence is good enough, then the series converges. But I'm not sure if you need a good ratio of convergence or it's valid for any convergence.
Is there any example of an oscillating sequence that converges to a real number in absolute value and it's sum is not convergent?

Anyway, I would like to see if there's an elementary way to solve this exercise because the expressions I found were horrible enough to make me think about proving a lemma rather than working with this series in particular.

Last edited:
SqueeSpleen said:

## Homework Statement

The original problem was to find for which real numbers the series
$$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} 2^{n} .\left( \dfrac{ n }{ n+1 } \right)^{n} x^{n}$$
converges.
I used ratio criterion, it gave me a radius of convergence equal to 1/2. For x=1/2, I showed that the sequence converges to 1/e, so the series cannot be convergent. For x=-1/2 I think it's convergent but were unable to find a concise way to prove it.
According to the ratio test a series converges if an+1/an-->q <1 when n-->infinity. Also, an should go to zero. What can be the value of x so as the series converge?

Well, I know that the series converges for all x with |x|<1/2, so for all x in (-1/2,1/2). But I'm trying to check if it converges for x=-1/2, for x=1/2 I showed it doesn't converge (it goes to infinity).
Oh sorry, I didn't really used ratio test, I used root test, English is not my native language and I mixed them up.

SqueeSpleen said:
Well, I know that the series converges for all x with |x|<1/2, so for all x in (-1/2,1/2). But I'm trying to check if it converges for x=-1/2, for x=1/2 I showed it doesn't converge (it goes to infinity).
Oh sorry, I didn't really used ratio test, I used root test, English is not my native language and I mixed them up.

A series is convergent if the sequence of its partial sums S1, S2 ...Sn tends to a limit L; that means that the partial sums become closer and closer to a given number L when the number of their terms increases.
if x=-1/2 you have the series Σ[(-n/(n+1)]n
Imagine that a the partial sum Sk is closer to L than a small quantity ε: L-ε<Sk < L+ε . Add the next term of the sequence to this partial sum. The magnitude of the terms of the sequence tend to e. So the next partial sum will differ from the previous one by almost e or -e. Does the series converge then?

Last edited:
Oh this is really embarrasing. Sorry hahaha.
Well, I will phrase what confused me: I'm pretty sure this series has two convergent subsequences. But yes, the series per-se is not convergent as for that the term inside MUST go to zero.
This is a good example of why it's better to post the original problem instead of the one, one wants to solve hehe.
Moral of the history: Next time you put a sequence in the calculator don't only compute the partial sums for n=100, 200 and 1000, try consecutive terms too <.<

Thank you!

Last edited:
SqueeSpleen said:

## Homework Statement

The original problem was to find for which real numbers the series
$$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} 2^{n} .\left( \dfrac{ n }{ n+1 } \right)^{n} x^{n}$$
converges.
I used root criterion, it gave me a radius of convergence equal to 1/2. For x=1/2, I showed that the sequence converges to 1/e, so the series cannot be convergent. For x=-1/2 I think it's convergent but were unable to find a concise way to prove it.

## Homework Equations

None really, not that I can think off. Well, I have the following expression that I don't think it can be simplified. This is what I got when I summed the nth and (n+1)th terms.
$$- \left( \dfrac{n}{n+1} \right)^{n}+ \left( \dfrac{ n+1 }{ n+2 } \right) ^{n+1}$$

## The Attempt at a Solution

For x=-1/2 the sequence inside the series has the same absolute value than the previous one, so in absolute value the general term approaches 1/e. I think it converges, but I'm not sure how to prove it. The expression that I found trying to group the first term with the second one, the third one with the fourth one and so, is horrible and I don't think I can work with it.
I'm sure that it's easy to prove that if an oscillating series has an associated sequence that converges to a number, and the rate of convergence is good enough, then the series converges. But I'm not sure if you need a good ratio of convergence or it's valid for any convergence.
Is there any example of an oscillating sequence that converges to a real number in absolute value and it's sum is not convergent?

Anyway, I would like to see if there's an elementary way to solve this exercise because the expressions I found were horrible enough to make me think about proving a lemma rather than working with this series in particular.

Note that for large ##n## we have ##\left(\frac{n+1}{n}\right)^n = \left( 1 + \frac{1}{n} \right)^n \sim e,## so the ##n##th term of the series looks like ##e(2x)^n## for large ##n##. So, for ##x = -1/2## we have, essentially, the series ##1 -1 +1 -1 + 1 -1 + \cdots##. Do you think that converges?

Ray Vickson said:
Note that for large ##n## we have ##\left(\frac{n+1}{n}\right)^n = \left( 1 + \frac{1}{n} \right)^n \sim e,## so the ##n##th term of the series looks like ##e(2x)^n## for large ##n##. So, for ##x = -1/2## we have, essentially, the series ##1 -1 +1 -1 + 1 -1 + \cdots##. Do you think that converges?
Yes. Well, in fact it does look like 1/e because the +1 is in the denominator. But the idea stands exactly as it stands with it converging to e.

That's exactly how I proved that the series doesn't converge for x=1/2, I proved that the general term converges to 1/e so the series cannot be convergent.
And that's why I'm embarrased as well viewing that seeing that it doesn't converge for x=-1/2 was completely trivial from this point. But I was too hasty to "simplify" the problem and ended up with a subsequence of the partial sums, one that converges and has an horrible expression of general terms.

## 1. What does it mean for a series to converge?

A series converges when the terms of the series approach a finite limit as the number of terms increases. In other words, the sum of all the terms in the series approaches a specific value as the number of terms increases.

## 2. How do you show that a series converges?

To show that a series converges, you can use various convergence tests, such as the ratio test, comparison test, or integral test. These tests help determine if the series approaches a finite limit as the number of terms increases, thus showing convergence.

## 3. What is the importance of proving that a series converges?

Proving that a series converges is crucial in many mathematical and scientific applications. It allows for accurate calculations and predictions, as well as ensuring that the series represents a valid and meaningful solution to a problem.

## 4. Can a series diverge even if its individual terms approach zero?

Yes, a series can still diverge even if its individual terms approach zero. This is because the sum of infinitely many small terms may still result in an infinitely large value, making the series divergent.

## 5. Is it possible for a series to converge for some values of its terms, but diverge for others?

Yes, it is possible for a series to converge for certain values of its terms and diverge for others. This is known as conditional convergence, and it occurs when the series converges when its terms are arranged in a specific order but diverges when they are arranged differently.

• Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
376
• Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
309
• Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
749
• Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
758
• Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
172
• Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
776
• Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
806
• Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
• Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
397
• Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
479