Why is $U_n$ greater than $\frac{A}{n}$ for large enough values of $n$?

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ognik
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Comparison Limit
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the inequality $U_n > \frac{A}{n}$ for large values of $n$, derived from the limit $\lim_{{n}\to{\infty}} n U_n = A > 0$. Participants clarify that for sufficiently large $n$, $U_n$ must exceed $\frac{A}{2n}$, leading to the conclusion that the series $\sum U_n$ diverges. A counter-example using $u_n = \frac{1}{n}$ is presented to illustrate the incorrectness of a proposed inequality. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the behavior of sequences and series in mathematical analysis.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of limits and convergence in sequences
  • Familiarity with the comparison test for series
  • Knowledge of asymptotic notation and behavior of functions
  • Basic concepts of mathematical analysis, particularly series divergence
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of limits in sequences, focusing on $\lim_{{n}\to{\infty}} n U_n$
  • Learn about the comparison test in series convergence and divergence
  • Explore asymptotic analysis and its applications in mathematical proofs
  • Investigate counter-examples in mathematical inequalities to strengthen understanding
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone interested in advanced calculus or real analysis, particularly those studying series convergence and divergence.

ognik
Messages
626
Reaction score
2
Hi, my book says that $\lim_{{n}\to{\infty}} {n}^{p}U_n \rightarrow A \lt \infty, p \gt 1 $ means that $U_n \lt \frac{A}{{n}^{p}} $, which I can see

But apparently $ \lim_{{n}\to{\infty}}n U_n = A \gt 0 $ means that $ U_n \gt \frac{A}{n} $ I know this is going to sound like a stupid question, but please walk me through why this is? My head is stuck in a loop and maybe why I think I understand the 1st one is wrong as well... Thanks for patience :-)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your inequality is not correct as stated. Take $u_n = \frac{1}{n}$ as counter-example. See it does not work.

Instead here is an alternative one.

Let $\varepsilon = \frac{A}{2} > 0$. There exists an $N>0$ large enough so that if $n>N$ then $|nu_n - A| < \frac{1}{2}A$. In particular, $\frac{1}{2}A< nu_n < \frac{3}{2}A$ and so we see that $u_n > \frac{A}{2n}$. Not for all $n$, but those those large enough and beyond $N$.
 
ognik said:
But apparently $ \lim_{{n}\to{\infty}}n U_n = A \gt 0 $ means that $ U_n \gt \frac{A}{n} $

So $nU_n \le A, \therefore U_n \le \frac{A}{n}$ , but then how do I show - using the comparison test - that $\sum_{}^{} U_n$ diverges? Unless there is a typo in the book 'cos it seems to me to converge?
 
ognik said:
So $nU_n \le A, \therefore U_n \le \frac{A}{n}$ , but then how do I show - using the comparison test - that $\sum_{}^{} U_n$ diverges? Unless there is a typo in the book 'cos it seems to me to converge?

We showed that $u_n > \tfrac{A}{2n}$ and $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{n}$ diverges, therefore $u_n$ diverges.
 
ThePerfectHacker said:
Your inequality is not correct as stated. Take $u_n = \frac{1}{n}$ as counter-example. See it does not work.

Instead here is an alternative one.

Let $\varepsilon = \frac{A}{2} > 0$. There exists an $N>0$ large enough so that if $n>N$ then $|nu_n - A| < \frac{1}{2}A$. In particular, $\frac{1}{2}A< nu_n < \frac{3}{2}A$ and so we see that $u_n > \frac{A}{2n}$. Not for all $n$, but those those large enough and beyond $N$.
Sorry, I confess I couldn't follow your argument.
I understand what some N, n > N means, but I don't see where the step $|nu_n - A| < \frac{1}{2}A$ comes from?
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K