Showing that if lim a^2 = 0 implies lim a = 0

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mr Davis 97
  • Start date Start date
Mr Davis 97
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
44

Homework Statement


Suppose that ##a_n## is a sequence such that ##\sum_{n=1}^\infty a_n^2## converges. Show that ##\lim_{n\to\infty}a_n = 0##.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


My idea was this. Since ##a_n^2## converges, we have that ##\lim_{n\to\infty}a_n^2 = 0##. I want to claim that ##\lim_{n\to\infty}a_n^2 = (\lim_{n\to\infty}a_n)^2 = 0##, but is this justified? Don't I have to know that ##a_n## does in fact converge before I can use the algebra of limits?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You cannot reason that way: For ##a_n=(-1)^n## we have ##\lim a_n^2=1## whereas ##\lim a_n## does not exist. So at least more care is needed.
 
fresh_42 said:
You cannot reason that way: For ##a_n=(-1)^n## we have ##\lim a_n^2=1## whereas ##\lim a_n## does not exist. So at least more care is needed.
I think I can show it using an epsilon-delta proof:

Let ##\epsilon > 0##. There exists ##N## such that ##n\ge N## implies that ##|a_n^2| < \epsilon^2##. So ##|a_n| < \epsilon##, by taking the square root of both sides. Is this correct? Is this the best way to show this?
 
Mr Davis 97 said:
I think I can show it using an epsilon-delta proof:

Let ##\epsilon > 0##. There exists ##N## such that ##n\ge N## implies that ##|a_n^2| < \epsilon^2##. So ##|a_n| < \epsilon##, by taking the square root of both sides. Is this correct? Is this the best way to show this?
Yes.

You implicitly used ##\sum |b_n| < \infty \Longrightarrow \lim |b_n|=0\,##, so I'm not sure if you have this or still need to show it.
 
fresh_42 said:
You cannot reason that way: For ##a_n=(-1)^n## we have ##\lim a_n^2=1## whereas ##\lim a_n## does not exist. So at least more care is needed.

Nice profile picture. What/who exactly are these people? :)
 
Easy solution: ##a_n^2 \to 0 \implies |a_n| \to 0 \implies a_n \to 0##

where I used that square root is continuous.
 
  • Like
Likes Mr Davis 97
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top