Prove the alternating sum of a decreasing sequence converging to $0$ is Cauchy.Suppose for all positive integers $n$, $|x_n-y_n|< frac1n$ Prove that $(x_n)$ is also Cauchy.Proof check for completenessProve that $d_n$ is a Cauchy sequence in $mathbbR$Prove $aX_n +bY_n$ is a Cauchy Sequence.Prove a sequence is a Cauchy and thus convergentIf $(x_n)$ and $(y_n)$ are Cauchy sequences, then give a direct argument that $ (x_n + y_n)$ is a Cauchy sequenceIf $x_n$ and $y_n$ are Cauchy then $leftfrac2x_ny_nright$ is CauchyLet $x_n$ be a Cauchy sequence of rational numbers. Define a new sequence $y_n$ by $y_n = (x_n)(x_n+1)$. Show that $y_n$ is a CS.Let $x_n$ be a Cauchy sequence of real numbers, prove that a new sequence $y_n$, with $y_n$=$x_n^frac13$, is also a Cauchy sequence.$x_n rightarrow x$ iff the modified sequence is Cauchy
Adjacent DEM color matching in QGIS
What is a smasher?
What is the solution to this metapuzzle from a university puzzling column?
Copy previous line to current line from text file
Will 700 more planes a day fly because of the Heathrow expansion?
Pressure inside an infinite ocean?
Where is the documentation for this ex command?
Why do people keep telling me that I am a bad photographer?
Causes of bimodal distributions when bootstrapping a meta-analysis model
Emotional immaturity of comic-book version of superhero Shazam
How do inspiraling black holes get closer?
Why wasn't the Night King naked in S08E03?
Wrong answer from DSolve when solving a differential equation
Understanding trademark infringements in a world where many dictionary words are trademarks?
Is there an idiom that support the idea that "inflation is bad"?
Why aren't nationalizations in Russia described as socialist?
How should I tell my manager I'm not paying for an optional after work event I'm not going to?
Are the Night's Watch still required?
How to adjust tikz picture so it fits to current size of a table cell?
How can I roleplay a follower-type character when I as a player have a leader-type personality?
What does this wavy downward arrow preceding a piano chord mean?
Can my 2 children 10 and 12 Travel to the USA on expired American Passports? They are US citizens
Out of scope work duties and resignation
Is there an official reason for not adding a post-credits scene?
Prove the alternating sum of a decreasing sequence converging to $0$ is Cauchy.
Suppose for all positive integers $n$, $|x_n-y_n|< frac1n$ Prove that $(x_n)$ is also Cauchy.Proof check for completenessProve that $d_n$ is a Cauchy sequence in $mathbbR$Prove $aX_n +bY_n$ is a Cauchy Sequence.Prove a sequence is a Cauchy and thus convergentIf $(x_n)$ and $(y_n)$ are Cauchy sequences, then give a direct argument that $ (x_n + y_n)$ is a Cauchy sequenceIf $x_n$ and $y_n$ are Cauchy then $leftfrac2x_ny_nright$ is CauchyLet $x_n$ be a Cauchy sequence of rational numbers. Define a new sequence $y_n$ by $y_n = (x_n)(x_n+1)$. Show that $y_n$ is a CS.Let $x_n$ be a Cauchy sequence of real numbers, prove that a new sequence $y_n$, with $y_n$=$x_n^frac13$, is also a Cauchy sequence.$x_n rightarrow x$ iff the modified sequence is Cauchy
$begingroup$
Let $(x_n)$ be a decreasing sequence with $x_n > 0$ for all $n in mathbbN$, and $(x_n) to 0$. Let $(y_n)$ be defined for all $n in mathbbN$ by
$$y_n = x_0 - x_1 + x_2 - cdots + (-1)^n x_n .$$
I want to show, using the $varepsilon$ definition, that $(y_n)$ is Cauchy.
I am trying to find, given $varepsilon > 0$, a real number $N$ such that for all $m$ and $n$ with $m > n > N$, $|y_m - y_n| < varepsilon$.
I have been going backwards to try and find $N$, and have
beginalign*
|y_m - y_n| & = left| (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m) - (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_n) right| \
|y_m - y_n| & = left| x_n + 1 - x_n + 2 + cdots pm x_m right| \
|y_m - y_n| & leq | x_n + 1 | + | x_n + 2 | + cdots + | x_m | \
|y_m - y_n| & leq ?
endalign*
I do not know how to get a solution from there, and am not sure about the process, particurlary the last step since I feel getting rid of the minuses might prevent me from finding a solution.
real-analysis cauchy-sequences
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $(x_n)$ be a decreasing sequence with $x_n > 0$ for all $n in mathbbN$, and $(x_n) to 0$. Let $(y_n)$ be defined for all $n in mathbbN$ by
$$y_n = x_0 - x_1 + x_2 - cdots + (-1)^n x_n .$$
I want to show, using the $varepsilon$ definition, that $(y_n)$ is Cauchy.
I am trying to find, given $varepsilon > 0$, a real number $N$ such that for all $m$ and $n$ with $m > n > N$, $|y_m - y_n| < varepsilon$.
I have been going backwards to try and find $N$, and have
beginalign*
|y_m - y_n| & = left| (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m) - (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_n) right| \
|y_m - y_n| & = left| x_n + 1 - x_n + 2 + cdots pm x_m right| \
|y_m - y_n| & leq | x_n + 1 | + | x_n + 2 | + cdots + | x_m | \
|y_m - y_n| & leq ?
endalign*
I do not know how to get a solution from there, and am not sure about the process, particurlary the last step since I feel getting rid of the minuses might prevent me from finding a solution.
real-analysis cauchy-sequences
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
Apr 25 at 1:17
$begingroup$
@RobertShore is my answer okay?
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 1:37
$begingroup$
@RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
$endgroup$
– oranji
Apr 25 at 4:05
1
$begingroup$
I meant to say you can prove by induction that $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n|$. Since $lim x_n=0$, choose $N$ such that $n gt N Rightarrow |x_n| lt epsilon$. Then $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n| lt epsilon$ so $y_n$ is Cauchy.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
Apr 25 at 5:54
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $(x_n)$ be a decreasing sequence with $x_n > 0$ for all $n in mathbbN$, and $(x_n) to 0$. Let $(y_n)$ be defined for all $n in mathbbN$ by
$$y_n = x_0 - x_1 + x_2 - cdots + (-1)^n x_n .$$
I want to show, using the $varepsilon$ definition, that $(y_n)$ is Cauchy.
I am trying to find, given $varepsilon > 0$, a real number $N$ such that for all $m$ and $n$ with $m > n > N$, $|y_m - y_n| < varepsilon$.
I have been going backwards to try and find $N$, and have
beginalign*
|y_m - y_n| & = left| (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m) - (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_n) right| \
|y_m - y_n| & = left| x_n + 1 - x_n + 2 + cdots pm x_m right| \
|y_m - y_n| & leq | x_n + 1 | + | x_n + 2 | + cdots + | x_m | \
|y_m - y_n| & leq ?
endalign*
I do not know how to get a solution from there, and am not sure about the process, particurlary the last step since I feel getting rid of the minuses might prevent me from finding a solution.
real-analysis cauchy-sequences
$endgroup$
Let $(x_n)$ be a decreasing sequence with $x_n > 0$ for all $n in mathbbN$, and $(x_n) to 0$. Let $(y_n)$ be defined for all $n in mathbbN$ by
$$y_n = x_0 - x_1 + x_2 - cdots + (-1)^n x_n .$$
I want to show, using the $varepsilon$ definition, that $(y_n)$ is Cauchy.
I am trying to find, given $varepsilon > 0$, a real number $N$ such that for all $m$ and $n$ with $m > n > N$, $|y_m - y_n| < varepsilon$.
I have been going backwards to try and find $N$, and have
beginalign*
|y_m - y_n| & = left| (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m) - (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_n) right| \
|y_m - y_n| & = left| x_n + 1 - x_n + 2 + cdots pm x_m right| \
|y_m - y_n| & leq | x_n + 1 | + | x_n + 2 | + cdots + | x_m | \
|y_m - y_n| & leq ?
endalign*
I do not know how to get a solution from there, and am not sure about the process, particurlary the last step since I feel getting rid of the minuses might prevent me from finding a solution.
real-analysis cauchy-sequences
real-analysis cauchy-sequences
edited Apr 25 at 6:53
Asaf Karagila♦
310k33442776
310k33442776
asked Apr 25 at 0:51
oranjioranji
616
616
1
$begingroup$
Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
Apr 25 at 1:17
$begingroup$
@RobertShore is my answer okay?
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 1:37
$begingroup$
@RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
$endgroup$
– oranji
Apr 25 at 4:05
1
$begingroup$
I meant to say you can prove by induction that $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n|$. Since $lim x_n=0$, choose $N$ such that $n gt N Rightarrow |x_n| lt epsilon$. Then $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n| lt epsilon$ so $y_n$ is Cauchy.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
Apr 25 at 5:54
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
Apr 25 at 1:17
$begingroup$
@RobertShore is my answer okay?
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 1:37
$begingroup$
@RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
$endgroup$
– oranji
Apr 25 at 4:05
1
$begingroup$
I meant to say you can prove by induction that $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n|$. Since $lim x_n=0$, choose $N$ such that $n gt N Rightarrow |x_n| lt epsilon$. Then $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n| lt epsilon$ so $y_n$ is Cauchy.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
Apr 25 at 5:54
1
1
$begingroup$
Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
Apr 25 at 1:17
$begingroup$
Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
Apr 25 at 1:17
$begingroup$
@RobertShore is my answer okay?
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 1:37
$begingroup$
@RobertShore is my answer okay?
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 1:37
$begingroup$
@RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
$endgroup$
– oranji
Apr 25 at 4:05
$begingroup$
@RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
$endgroup$
– oranji
Apr 25 at 4:05
1
1
$begingroup$
I meant to say you can prove by induction that $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n|$. Since $lim x_n=0$, choose $N$ such that $n gt N Rightarrow |x_n| lt epsilon$. Then $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n| lt epsilon$ so $y_n$ is Cauchy.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
Apr 25 at 5:54
$begingroup$
I meant to say you can prove by induction that $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n|$. Since $lim x_n=0$, choose $N$ such that $n gt N Rightarrow |x_n| lt epsilon$. Then $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n| lt epsilon$ so $y_n$ is Cauchy.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
Apr 25 at 5:54
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.
What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:
- Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$
Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:
$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$
$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$
Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$
Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
This is exactly what I was about to do.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 4:06
1
$begingroup$
@SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
$endgroup$
– trancelocation
Apr 25 at 4:07
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".
We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$
$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.
$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$
$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.
$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.
Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.
Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.
Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
$endgroup$
– oranji
Apr 25 at 4:02
$begingroup$
I'll edit this answer.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 4:05
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3201256%2fprove-the-alternating-sum-of-a-decreasing-sequence-converging-to-0-is-cauchy%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.
What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:
- Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$
Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:
$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$
$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$
Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$
Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
This is exactly what I was about to do.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 4:06
1
$begingroup$
@SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
$endgroup$
– trancelocation
Apr 25 at 4:07
add a comment |
$begingroup$
To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.
What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:
- Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$
Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:
$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$
$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$
Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$
Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
This is exactly what I was about to do.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 4:06
1
$begingroup$
@SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
$endgroup$
– trancelocation
Apr 25 at 4:07
add a comment |
$begingroup$
To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.
What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:
- Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$
Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:
$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$
$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$
Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$
Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$
$endgroup$
To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.
What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:
- Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$
Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:
$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$
$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$
Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$
Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$
edited Apr 25 at 4:22
answered Apr 25 at 4:05
trancelocationtrancelocation
14.8k1929
14.8k1929
$begingroup$
This is exactly what I was about to do.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 4:06
1
$begingroup$
@SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
$endgroup$
– trancelocation
Apr 25 at 4:07
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is exactly what I was about to do.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 4:06
1
$begingroup$
@SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
$endgroup$
– trancelocation
Apr 25 at 4:07
$begingroup$
This is exactly what I was about to do.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 4:06
$begingroup$
This is exactly what I was about to do.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 4:06
1
1
$begingroup$
@SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
$endgroup$
– trancelocation
Apr 25 at 4:07
$begingroup$
@SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
$endgroup$
– trancelocation
Apr 25 at 4:07
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".
We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$
$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.
$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$
$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.
$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.
Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.
Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.
Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
$endgroup$
– oranji
Apr 25 at 4:02
$begingroup$
I'll edit this answer.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 4:05
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".
We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$
$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.
$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$
$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.
$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.
Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.
Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.
Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
$endgroup$
– oranji
Apr 25 at 4:02
$begingroup$
I'll edit this answer.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 4:05
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".
We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$
$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.
$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$
$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.
$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.
Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.
Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.
Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.
$endgroup$
This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".
We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$
$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.
$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$
$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.
$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.
Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.
Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.
Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.
answered Apr 25 at 1:30
Subhasis BiswasSubhasis Biswas
655512
655512
$begingroup$
I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
$endgroup$
– oranji
Apr 25 at 4:02
$begingroup$
I'll edit this answer.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 4:05
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
$endgroup$
– oranji
Apr 25 at 4:02
$begingroup$
I'll edit this answer.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 4:05
$begingroup$
I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
$endgroup$
– oranji
Apr 25 at 4:02
$begingroup$
I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
$endgroup$
– oranji
Apr 25 at 4:02
$begingroup$
I'll edit this answer.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 4:05
$begingroup$
I'll edit this answer.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 4:05
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3201256%2fprove-the-alternating-sum-of-a-decreasing-sequence-converging-to-0-is-cauchy%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
Apr 25 at 1:17
$begingroup$
@RobertShore is my answer okay?
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
Apr 25 at 1:37
$begingroup$
@RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
$endgroup$
– oranji
Apr 25 at 4:05
1
$begingroup$
I meant to say you can prove by induction that $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n|$. Since $lim x_n=0$, choose $N$ such that $n gt N Rightarrow |x_n| lt epsilon$. Then $|y_m-y_n| leq |x_n| lt epsilon$ so $y_n$ is Cauchy.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
Apr 25 at 5:54