What is the Formal Definition of a Series' Limit?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Abukadu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limits Series
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the formal definition of a series' limit in the context of mathematical analysis, specifically focusing on convergence and the behavior of sequences and their averages. The original poster seeks clarification on how to express the negation of a limit and to prove a relationship involving limits and arithmetic averages.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the formal definition of a limit and its negation, questioning how to articulate these concepts using epsilon and N notation. There is also an inquiry into the relationship between the convergence of a series and the behavior of its arithmetic averages.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the formal definition of limits and the implications of negating such definitions. There is ongoing exploration of the original poster's confusion regarding these concepts, with attempts to clarify the necessary steps and reasoning involved.

Contextual Notes

The original poster expresses difficulty in articulating their thoughts due to language barriers and the complexity of translating their attempts from Hebrew. This may affect the clarity of their contributions to the discussion.

Abukadu
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
hi :]

a couple of questions:

1) Using epsilon and N, write in a formal manner the following statement:
L is not a the limit of the general series {an} when n goes from 1 to infinity.

2) prove the next sentence: if a series an is converging into a final limit L, then the arithmetic avareges of the series organs(terms?) are gathering into the same limit. meaning:
lim (an)[n->infinity] = L = = = > lim [n->infinity] (a1+a2+a3..+an) / n = L

excuse my english.. not my strongest side.
I really wish I could write down my attempts to solve the question by they are all in hebrew and are too hard to translate since I'm not sure myself that I'm on the right path..


Thanks,
sharon.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Recall the definition of limit:
\lim_{n \to \infty} a_n = L means that \forall \epsilon > 0, \cdots ?

Then for 1 negate that statement:
\lim_{n \to \infty} a_n \neq L means that \neg(\forall \epsilon > 0, \cdots) \Leftrightarrow \exists \epsilon > 0, \cdots ?

For 2, you will somehow need to estimate the arithmetic average (yes, they are called terms, although organs is a nice one as well :smile:). That is, if you know that an comes arbitrarily close to L, then you want to show the same for (a1 + ... + an)/n.
 
thanks, but i didnt really understood (1) ..
 
OK, first step:
what is the definition of
\lim_{n \to \infty} a_n = L
 
the limit exists if for each ε > 0 there exists an R such that qqq |f(x) - L| < ε whenever x > R

so the limit does not exists when |f(x) - L| < ε whenever x < R ?
 
Abukadu said:
the limit exists if for each ε > 0 there exists an R such that qqq |f(x) - L| < ε whenever x > R
Right.

Abukadu said:
so the limit does not exists when |f(x) - L| < ε whenever x < R ?
No. The limit is not L, if it is not true that for each ε > 0 there exists an R such that |f(x) - L| < ε whenever x > R. In a first mathematics course you must have learned how to rewrite such a statement. Things like: if it is not true that all cows eat grass, then there must exist a cow who does not eat grass. In this case, your answer would start with: "the limit is not L, when there exists an ε > 0, ..."
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
20K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K