1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Homework Help: Uniform conevergence

  1. Jul 11, 2006 #1
    Uniform convergence

    I've got a short question to an example.
    I should check the following sequence for uniform convergence on the whole of [itex]\mathbb{R}[/itex]:
    It says that the conevergence is nonuniform, because:
    Obviously they put [itex]x=1/n[/itex]. I cannot see why this is true.
    I tried to differentiate the given function sequence and see, wether the derivative can become zero or not, i.e. I look for maximum values, but the derivative term gets difficult to manage in the end.
    How can I make it clear to myself that the above inequality holds?
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2006
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 11, 2006 #2


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Hello little Hilbert,

    Are you sure that the inequality shouldn't read something like:

    [itex]sup_{\mathbb{R}}|\frac{nx(7+sin(nx))}{4+n^2x^2}|\leq{\frac{7+sin1}{5}[/itex] ?

    You need to find a supremum to show that the series of functions converges uniformly on R.

    Obviously the sinus term can be 1 at max. And after canceling nx you will have the given numerator already. Can you go from there and find the denominator?


    Last edited: Jul 11, 2006
  4. Jul 11, 2006 #3
    No, the greater-equals-sign is correct.
    Estimatation from above is:
    [itex]|\frac{nx(7+sin(nx))}{4+n^2x^2}|\le{\frac{8n|x|}{4+n^2x^2}[/itex], because [itex]|sin(nx)|\le{1}[/itex]...but it leads me to nowhere because I need a majorant independent of x.
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2006
  5. Jul 11, 2006 #4


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    My bad, I thought you'd have to show that it does converge uniformly, sorry. :rolleyes:
  6. Jul 11, 2006 #5
    [itex]|\frac{nx(7+sin(nx))}{4+n^2x^2}|\le{\frac{8n|x|}{4 +n^2x^2}\le{\frac{8n|x|}{n^2x^2}\le{\frac{8}{nx} [/itex]

    and therefore f(x) is maximal for x = 1/n . You must now proove that

    lim(n->infinity) [ sup (|fn(x)-f(x)|)] > 0

    So : lim(n->infinity) [|8/(nx) - 8|] = 8 > 0

    Now you need to write this properly but the main ideas are there. My experiences with analysis have teached me that you cannot be rigourous enough so if anyone sees a flaw in my reasoning, don't hesitate to rectify my monstrosities.
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2006
  7. Jul 12, 2006 #6


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    The maximum of f(x) is not at x=1/n. It's probably at someplace gross. Fortunately we don't need to know where it is.

    Every place you see an "n" in your function f_n(x), there's an "x" living next to it, you can think of it as a function of "nx". So if you set x=1/n the result will be entirely devoid of x and n, it's just a convenient place to evaluate f at that gives a constant. You could have taken x=2/n, or pi/n, etc.

    So we know for any n,


    Hence for any n we have


    since f_n(x) takes on a value larger than 1.
  8. Jul 12, 2006 #7
    Taking x = 2/n or pi/n does not bound 8/(nx) maximaly but work just fine too given the fact that you must disprove the unif.conv. The use of x = 1/n seems to be forced by the " sup " part of the equation. Nevertheless, I seem to be using a slightly different theorem than you ( even if they are equiavlent) and I thank you for bringing to my attention an easier way to investigate such interesting matter.
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2006
  9. Jul 12, 2006 #8


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Nor would x=1/n. But making 8/(nx) large won't help an upper bound.

    All you've shown is there that f_n(1/n)<8. Bounding one point of the function from above does not tell you anything at all about the sup over the reals. (again I'll points out that the maximum of f_n(x) does not occur at x=1/n, and again that we don't even care)

    You want to bound the sup from below in any case. For that it's enough to have a sequence of points where [tex]f_n(x_n)[/tex] is bounded away from zero, i.e. they are all >=k for some fixed k>0.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook