A sequence of functions evaluated at a sequence

In summary, evaluating a sequence of functions at a sequence involves applying each function in the sequence to each element in the given sequence and recording the resulting values. The purpose of this is to analyze patterns and behavior of the values, and it can be helpful in solving mathematical problems. A sequence of functions can be evaluated at a non-numerical sequence as long as the input values are valid. Some common examples include evaluating polynomial, trigonometric, and recursive functions at sequences of integers, angles, and natural numbers respectively. The order of evaluation depends on the specific functions and sequence, but it is generally recommended to follow the order of the given sequence.
  • #1
AxiomOfChoice
533
1
What are the rules if you have a sequence [itex]f_n[/itex] of real-valued functions on [itex]\mathbb R[/itex] and consider the sequence [itex]f_n(x_n)[/itex], where [itex]x_n[/itex] is some sequence of real numbers that converges: [itex]x_n \to x[/itex]. All I have found is an exercise in Baby Rudin that says that if [itex]f_n \to f[/itex] uniformly on [itex]E[/itex], then [itex]f_n(x_n) \to f(x)[/itex] if [itex]x_n \to x[/itex] is in [itex]E[/itex]. But the exercise seems to indicate that it is possible to have [itex]f_n(x_n) \to f(x)[/itex] for every sequence [itex]x_n\to x[/itex] without having [itex]f_n \to f[/itex] uniformly. (I believe the canonical example [itex]f_n(x) = x^n[/itex] on [itex]E = [0,1][/itex] works here.)

I ask because I recently had a colleague who claimed that if [itex]x_n \to x[/itex], then [itex] \left( 1 + \frac{x}{n} \right)^n \to e^x[/itex]. She asked what the rule that made this possible was, and I replied that I wasn't sure if it was, in fact, true, since [itex]f_n(x) = \left( 1 + \frac xn \right)^n[/itex] obviously does not converge uniformly to [itex]e^x[/itex] on [itex]\mathbb R[/itex] (even though, obviously, [itex]f_n \to e^x[/itex] pointwise).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
For ##n## large enough:

##f_n(x_n)## is close to ##e^{x_n}##; and ##x_n## is close to ##x## so ##e^{x_n}## is close to ##e^x##
 
  • #3
PeroK said:
For ##n## large enough:

##f_n(x_n)## is close to ##e^{x_n}##; and ##x_n## is close to ##x## so ##e^{x_n}## is close to ##e^x##
So is it always true that if [itex]f_n \to f[/itex] pointwise and [itex]x_n \to x[/itex], then [itex]f_n(x_n) \to f(x)[/itex]?
 
  • #4
AxiomOfChoice said:
So is it always true that if [itex]f_n \to f[/itex] pointwise and [itex]x_n \to x[/itex], then [itex]f_n(x_n) \to f(x)[/itex]?

Why don't you try to prove it?

Hint: Does ##f_n(x)## converge uniformly to ##e^x## on any bounded interval?
 
Last edited:
  • #5
PeroK said:
Why don't you try to prove it?

Hint: Does ##f_n(x)## converge uniformly to ##e^x## on any bounded interval?
Ok, I think I see the strategy you are suggesting. Since [itex]\{ x_n \}[/itex] is bounded (since it converges), we have [itex]-M \leq x_n \leq M[/itex] for all [itex]n[/itex] and for some [itex]M[/itex]. I can restrict my attention to [itex][-M,M][/itex]. On that interval, [itex]\left( 1 + \frac xn \right)^n[/itex] converges uniformly to [itex]e^x[/itex], and I can apply the result of the Baby Rudin exercise.
 
  • #6
Here is what I have so far. I have decided to confine my attention to ##[0,\infty)##. Suppose ##f_n \to f## uniformly on a set ##E##, where each ##f_n## is continuous. (The latter is a hypothesis I inadvertently omitted from my previous posts.) Let ##\{ x_n \}## be a sequence of points in ##E## with ##x_n \to x##. Then, given ##\epsilon > 0##, there exists ##N \in \mathbb N## such that ##n > N## implies ##|f_n(x) - f(x)| < \epsilon/2## for all ##x\in E## and ##|f(x_n) - f(x)| < \epsilon/2##, since the limit function ##f## is continuous. Then for ##n > N##,

##|f_n(x_n) - f(x)| < |f_n(x_n) - f(x_n)| + |f(x_n) - f(x)| < \frac{\epsilon}{2} + \frac{\epsilon}{2} = \epsilon##.

The terms of ##\{ x_n \}## are bounded; suppose they are contained in an interval ##[-M,M]##. Then

##M_n = \sup_{x\in [-M,M]} \left| \left(1 + \frac{x}{n} \right)^n - e^x \right|##

is a decreasing sequence bounded from below by ##0##; hence it converges to ##0##; hence ##\left( 1 + \frac{x}{n} \right)^n \to e^x## uniformly on ##[-M,M]##, which is what we wanted.
 

FAQ: A sequence of functions evaluated at a sequence

What does it mean to evaluate a sequence of functions at a sequence?

Evaluating a sequence of functions at a sequence means to apply each function in the sequence to each element in the given sequence and record the resulting values.

What is the purpose of evaluating a sequence of functions at a sequence?

The purpose of evaluating a sequence of functions at a sequence is to analyze the behavior and patterns of the resulting values. This can help in understanding the relationship between the functions and the sequence, and can also be useful in solving various mathematical problems.

Can a sequence of functions be evaluated at a non-numerical sequence?

Yes, a sequence of functions can be evaluated at a non-numerical sequence, as long as the input values are valid for the functions in the sequence. This can include sequences of symbols, letters, or any other type of data.

What are some common examples of evaluating a sequence of functions at a sequence?

Some common examples include evaluating a polynomial function at a sequence of integers, evaluating a trigonometric function at a sequence of angles, and evaluating a recursive function at a sequence of natural numbers.

Is there a specific order in which the functions should be evaluated in a sequence of functions evaluated at a sequence?

The order of evaluation depends on the specific sequence of functions and the nature of the given sequence. In general, it is recommended to follow the order of the given sequence, but the functions can also be evaluated in any other desired order.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
804
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
502
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top