yungman said:
There is no saying that ##A_n## and ##B_n## are smaller than one. Besides, your assumption will limit the solution to be less than 1, that is not right.
You seem to think that a solution of Laplace's equation in the open disk ##r < a## must necessarily be continuous on the closed disk ##r \leq a##. There is no reason for anything like that to be true; we often face problems of solving a PDE in the interior of a set ##S##, but with a boundary condition on the boundary ##\partial S## that is not everywhere continuous.
Take the current example: the book gives you a function
U(r,\theta-\phi) = \frac{a^2 - r^2}{a^2 + r^2 - 2 a r \cos(\theta - \phi)}.
Below, let ##t = \theta - \phi## for ease of writing.
It is easy to verify directly that ##U## solves Laplace's equation in the open region ##r < a##. Furthermore, for every point ##(a,t_0)## with ##t_0 \neq 0## the function is continuous at ##(a,t_0)##; that is,
\lim_{(r,t) \to (a,t_0)} = 0 = U(a,t_0).
However, ##U## is
not continuous at ##(a,0)## (or at ##(a, \pm 2 \pi n), n = 0, 1, 2, \ldots##). For example, for ##r = a## we have
U(a,t) = 0\; \forall\: t \neq 0,
so ##\lim_{t \to 0} U(a,t) = 0.## However, for ##r \neq a## we have
U(r,0) = \frac{a^2 - r^2}{a^2+r^2 - 2 a r} = \frac{a^2 - r^2}{(a-r)^2} = <br />
\frac{a+r}{a-r} \to +\infty\text{ as } r \to a-.
So, the function given to you in the book does satisfy Laplace's equation in the open disc and is continuous except at a single point on the boundary of the disc.
Exactly the same thing happens in the infinite-series representation of ##U##. The fact that the series fails to converge at a single point with ##r = a## is not problem; the function ##U## is just not continuous there, and that has absolutely nothing to do with the infinite series (or, rather, is reflected properly in the infinite series, as it should be).