Searching for Convergent Sequence: lim_n→∞ n(s_n-s_{n-1})=∞

  • Thread starter Poopsilon
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Sequence
In summary, the conversation is about finding a convergent sequence that satisfies the condition lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}n(s_n-s_{n-1})=\infty. One suggestion is to use the sequence sn=(-1)n/√n, which converges but does not satisfy the condition. The conversation then shifts to discussing Cesaro summation and finding a sequence where the Cesaro sum and the sequence have different limits. It is mentioned that Cesaro summation is convergence preserving and a specific example, {an}, is given to demonstrate this property.
  • #1
Poopsilon
294
1
I'm looking for a convergent sequence [tex]s_n[/tex] such that:

[tex]lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}n(s_n-s_{n-1})=\infty[/tex]

I've already gone pretty far afield in my hunt for such a sequence, so I thought I'd enlist the help of you fine folks in my search.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
If you are willing to accept conditionally convergent series, try sn=(-1)n/√n.
 
  • #3
Poopsilon said:
I'm looking for a convergent sequence [tex]s_n[/tex] such that:

[tex]lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}n(s_n-s_{n-1})=\infty[/tex]

I've already gone pretty far afield in my hunt for such a sequence, so I thought I'd enlist the help of you fine folks in my search.

mathman said:
If you are willing to accept conditionally convergent series, try sn=(-1)n/√n.

He is talking about a sequence, not a series. At least that's what he said although he did use notation that suggests partial sums of a series. Your sequence converges (not conditionally). If he meant what he said, your suggestion may work depending on what he really wants. If n is even, n(sn-sn-1) >0 and goes to ∞ through the subsequence of even numbers.But if n is odd it → -∞. Perhaps that is good enough.
 
  • #4
I think mathman may have misspoke when he said series, his sequence will work, all I needed was the absolute value of n(s_n-s_n-1) to increase without bound. Although for my ultimate purpose it turns out to be insufficient.

I'm taking a look at Cesaro summation: [tex]\sigma_n=\frac{s_0+s_1+...+s_n}{n+1}[/tex]
and trying to find a case where [tex]\lim\sigma_n=\sigma[/tex] while [tex]\lim s_n\neq\sigma.[/tex]
And if I am interpreting my book correctly the condition for the sequence s_n given in my original post is a necessary condition for this to occur, but upon doing the computation with mathman's example it appears not sufficient:
[tex]Set\;\; s_0=0,\;\; define\;\; s_n=\sum_{k=1}^{n}\frac{(-1)^k}{\sqrt{k}}\;\; for\;\; n\geq 1,\;\; and\;\; assume\;\; that\;\; \sigma_n=\sigma.\;\;\;\; Then\;\; [/tex][tex]\sigma_n=\frac{1}{n+1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{(-1)^i(n-i+1)}{\sqrt{i}}[/tex][tex]=\frac{1}{n+1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{(-1)^i(n+1)}{\sqrt{i}}-\frac{1}{n+1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{(-1)^ii}{\sqrt{i}}[/tex][tex]=\sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{(-1)^i}{\sqrt{i}}-\frac{1}{n+1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{(-1)^ii}{\sqrt{i}}[/tex][tex]=s_n+\frac{1}{n+1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}(-1)^i\sqrt{i}\rightarrow \lim s_n=\sigma\;\; as\;\; n\rightarrow\infty.[/tex]
Where the penultimate equality follows by definition, and the ultimate by our assumption.

So I'm curious if either of you can come up with a sequence which does provide different limits for sigma_n and s_n.

P.S. does anyone know how to not automatically go down to the next line every time one codes in some latex, it used to not do that but I think physicsforum like changed their latex format and now it does, thanks.

Edit: Actually I'm not entirely sure that [tex]\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\frac{1}{n+1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}(-1)^i\sqrt{i}=0.[/tex]
If not than mathman's sequence does work after all.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Poopsilon said:
I'm taking a look at Cesaro summation: [tex]\sigma_n=\frac{s_0+s_1+...+s_n}{n+1}[/tex]
and trying to find a case where [tex]\lim\sigma_n=\sigma[/tex] while [tex]\lim s_n\neq\sigma.[/tex]

I assume you are aware that Cesaro summation is convergence preserving. Look at the sequence {an} where an = 1 if n is even and 0 if n is odd. Here σn → 1/2 while {an} diverges.
 
  • #6
By convergence preserving are you implying that if both sigma_n and s_n converge than they must converge to the same value?
 
  • #7
Poopsilon said:
By convergence preserving are you implying that if both sigma_n and s_n converge than they must converge to the same value?

Yes. If a sequence converges then its Cesaro sum converges to the same limit. There is a general theorem by Toeplitz giving a conditions on a summability matrix that make it convergence preserving, which the Cesaro sum matrix satisfies. You can read about it at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silverman–Toeplitz_theorem

It is also not difficult to prove that result for Cesaro summation directly.
 

FAQ: Searching for Convergent Sequence: lim_n→∞ n(s_n-s_{n-1})=∞

What is a convergent sequence?

A convergent sequence is a sequence of numbers in which the terms get closer and closer to a specific value, called the limit, as the number of terms increases.

How do you find the limit of a convergent sequence?

The limit of a convergent sequence can be found by evaluating the terms of the sequence as n approaches infinity. The limit is the value that the terms converge to as n gets larger and larger.

What is the significance of the formula lim_n→∞ n(s_n-s_{n-1})=∞ ?

This formula is used to determine if a sequence is convergent or not. If the limit of the sequence, as n approaches infinity, is equal to infinity, then the sequence is not convergent. If the limit is a finite number, then the sequence is convergent.

How do you use the formula lim_n→∞ n(s_n-s_{n-1})=∞ to prove that a sequence is convergent?

If the limit of the sequence, as n approaches infinity, is a finite number, then the sequence is convergent. This can be proven by showing that the difference between the terms of the sequence approaches 0 as n gets larger and larger.

Is the formula lim_n→∞ n(s_n-s_{n-1})=∞ applicable to all sequences?

No, this formula is only applicable to sequences that are convergent. If the sequence is not convergent, the limit as n approaches infinity will not exist or will be equal to infinity, and the formula cannot be used.

Similar threads

Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
527
Replies
44
Views
5K
Back
Top