Strictly decreasing sequence (analysis)

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
1 reply · 4K views
riskandar
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



f(x) = (3 sin(x))/(2 + cos(x))

let x_0 be a number in (0, (2/3)*pi], and define a sequence recursively by setting
x_n+1 = f(x_n)

(1) prove that the sequence {x_n} is strictly decreasing sequence in (0, (2/3)*pi] and that lim x_n =0

(2) Find an integer k greater or equal to 1 such at {n^(1/k) x_n} is convergent to a finite, non-zero real number and evaluate lim n^(1/k) x_n

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



I tried the first problem by induction but I don't know how to prove it for P(n+1) (assuming P(n) is true). Any help is appreciated thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Don't think about this as an inductive argument at the bottom, but as an inequality.

Because your sequence is defined by iterating the function [tex]f[/tex], the simplest way to prove that [tex]x_{n+1} = f(x_n) < x_n[/tex] for all [tex]n[/tex] is to prove that [tex]f(x) < x[/tex] for all [tex]0 < x \leq \frac{2\pi}3[/tex].

(You also need to show that [tex]f(x)[/tex] still lies in [tex]\left(0, \frac{2\pi}3\right][/tex]; otherwise you can't conclude [tex]f(x_{n+1}) < x_{n+1}[/tex], because you don't know that [tex]x_{n+1}[/tex] is in the domain to which your inequality applies. This part of the argument is an induction.)

To show that [tex]x_n \to 0[/tex], you need a little more than that. When you prove the fact above, try to show not just that [tex]f(x) < x[/tex], but that [tex]f(x) < x[/tex] in some kind of systematic or predictable way. Think about examples of simple sequences that converge to zero, and try to establish a comparison with one of those.
 
Last edited: