#Sequence test
44 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)
Halex
- Do not ping the Moderators, unless someone is breaking the rules.
- Do not ping the Helper Moderators, unless there is a conflict between helpers.
- Do not ping other members randomly for help.
- Ask your question and show the work you've done so far. If you've posted a screenshot of a question, specify which part you need help with.
- Wait patiently for a helper to come along.
- If the Helper has answered your question, remember to thank them with the Mathematics Ranks bot and close the thread with:
+close
Feel free to nominate the person for helper of the week in #helper-nominations
If you're happy with the help you got here, and the server overall, you can contribute financially as well:
Assume $x_n$ converges to $a$, then $$x_{n+1} = \frac{x_{n+1}}{x_n} * x_n$$ and taking limit both sides we get $$a = La \implies L=1$$ which is a contradiction
Halex
Is this right
If that limit is L, then x(n) behaves like L^n for large n. And since L > 1, what can we say about the behavior of L^n?
How comes x_n behaves like L^n?
a(n) = L^n (perhaps, multiplied by a constant, but that doesn't matter) is the sequence that exactly satisfied a(n + 1)/a(n) = L.
Here it's in the limit, so it's not equal to that, but it still behaves like that.
Oh yeah that's an example but still stuck at proving this
provided a is positive
but a=0 is also a possibility
@nocturne lion
If we assume for a contradiction x_n converges to 0 then for all k > N we have x_{n+1}/x_n > 1
where N is large enough
then
$$\frac{|x_k|}{|x_N|} = \frac{|x_k|}{|x_{k-1}|}\ldots\frac{|x_{N+1}|}{|x_N|} > 1$$
aL
but then $$|x_k| > |x_N| > 0$$
aL
contradicting the assumption that x_k converges to 0
this is the same argument we can use to prove the d'Alembert test for divergence of series
Set $k=\frac{L+1}2>1.$ There exists $N$ such that $x_{n+1}>k\ x_n$ for $n\ge N$, hence $x_{n+m}>k^m\ x_n.$ As $k^m$ can be made arbitrary large, $(x_n)$ tends to $+\cal1$.
mimshell
are you working in the other case?
why is this?
I tried a similar approach:
For $\epsilon > 0$, there exists $N \in \mathbb{N}$ such that $$\forall n> N \implies \left| \frac{x_{n+1}}{x_n} - L < \epsilon \right| , $$ taking $\epsilon = \frac{L-1}{2} > 0$, we can deduce that $$\frac{L+1}{2} < \frac{x_{n+1}}{x_n}$$
because by assumption the ratio converges to L > 1, so eventually the ratios must be larger than 1+\delta for some delta > 0
Halex
We can show by induction that $$\left( \frac{L+1}{2} \right)^n < x_n$$ for $n$ arbitrary large, and since $\frac{L+1}{2} > 1$ this sequence on the left diverges, proving that $x_n$ diverges as well. Not sure if I did somethig work
Halex
n > N
I used induction to prove it works
@agile locust so, do you consider that what I did is correct?
@nocturne lion
Hello halex6825, this is a friendly reminder that your help request has been inactive for more than 24 hours. If you no longer need assistance, please consider closing the thread using the +close command. This thread will be automatically closed in 3 days if it remains inactive.
@agile locust @violet wadi @tender topaz The user still needs help with this help request.
+close
Please thank the helpers who assisted you by clicking the buttons below. You can thank each helper only once. Once you're done, click "Close Post" to close this thread.
Thank you for your feedback! aL has been awarded 1
. They now have 867
. They have 3
daily left for today.