Basic Real Analysis - Two sub sequences converging to different limits












0












$begingroup$


Going through some real analysis questions and have hit a boundary, the question is



Consider the sequence:



$$a_n := (-1)^nbiggl( 1 + frac{1}{n^2}biggl) , n in mathbb{N}$$



(a) Find a subsequence $a_{n_k}$ which satifies $a_{n_k}$ $rightarrow$ 1 as n $rightarrow$ $infty$



(b) Find a subequence $a_{m_k}$ which satifies $a_{m_k}$ $rightarrow$ -1 as n $rightarrow$ $infty$



(c) Using results from (a) and (b) prove that the entire sequence cannot converge to a real number



My answer for (a) was $$a_{n_k} := biggl( 1 + frac{1}{n^2}biggl)$$
and (b) was $$a_{m_k} := biggl( -1 - frac{1}{n^2}biggl)$$
However, I am unsure of the proper way to go about proving (c) (other than just saying, two sub-sequences converge to different limits hence the series must be divergent). Any help would be greatly appreciated






real-analysis







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I don't see a particular reason you can't use that argument. Since the limit of $a_{n_k}$ is not equal to the limit of $a_{m_k}$, it must be divergent. This is because of a known result that if a sequence converges, then all its subsequences converge to the same limit. The contrapositive of this, and thus equivalent, is that if two subsequences converge to different limits, then the sequence itself cannot be convergent.
    $endgroup$
    – Eevee Trainer
    Nov 29 '18 at 2:42












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, i guess i was overthinking a little. a conclusive sentence like that is pretty much what i was looking for
    $endgroup$
    – hellothere1
    Nov 29 '18 at 2:48






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The use of k in your answer makes no sense.
    $endgroup$
    – William Elliot
    Nov 29 '18 at 2:52
















0












$begingroup$


Going through some real analysis questions and have hit a boundary, the question is



Consider the sequence:



$$a_n := (-1)^nbiggl( 1 + frac{1}{n^2}biggl) , n in mathbb{N}$$



(a) Find a subsequence $a_{n_k}$ which satifies $a_{n_k}$ $rightarrow$ 1 as n $rightarrow$ $infty$



(b) Find a subequence $a_{m_k}$ which satifies $a_{m_k}$ $rightarrow$ -1 as n $rightarrow$ $infty$



(c) Using results from (a) and (b) prove that the entire sequence cannot converge to a real number



My answer for (a) was $$a_{n_k} := biggl( 1 + frac{1}{n^2}biggl)$$
and (b) was $$a_{m_k} := biggl( -1 - frac{1}{n^2}biggl)$$
However, I am unsure of the proper way to go about proving (c) (other than just saying, two sub-sequences converge to different limits hence the series must be divergent). Any help would be greatly appreciated






real-analysis







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I don't see a particular reason you can't use that argument. Since the limit of $a_{n_k}$ is not equal to the limit of $a_{m_k}$, it must be divergent. This is because of a known result that if a sequence converges, then all its subsequences converge to the same limit. The contrapositive of this, and thus equivalent, is that if two subsequences converge to different limits, then the sequence itself cannot be convergent.
    $endgroup$
    – Eevee Trainer
    Nov 29 '18 at 2:42












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, i guess i was overthinking a little. a conclusive sentence like that is pretty much what i was looking for
    $endgroup$
    – hellothere1
    Nov 29 '18 at 2:48






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The use of k in your answer makes no sense.
    $endgroup$
    – William Elliot
    Nov 29 '18 at 2:52














0












0








0





$begingroup$


Going through some real analysis questions and have hit a boundary, the question is



Consider the sequence:



$$a_n := (-1)^nbiggl( 1 + frac{1}{n^2}biggl) , n in mathbb{N}$$



(a) Find a subsequence $a_{n_k}$ which satifies $a_{n_k}$ $rightarrow$ 1 as n $rightarrow$ $infty$



(b) Find a subequence $a_{m_k}$ which satifies $a_{m_k}$ $rightarrow$ -1 as n $rightarrow$ $infty$



(c) Using results from (a) and (b) prove that the entire sequence cannot converge to a real number



My answer for (a) was $$a_{n_k} := biggl( 1 + frac{1}{n^2}biggl)$$
and (b) was $$a_{m_k} := biggl( -1 - frac{1}{n^2}biggl)$$
However, I am unsure of the proper way to go about proving (c) (other than just saying, two sub-sequences converge to different limits hence the series must be divergent). Any help would be greatly appreciated






real-analysis







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Going through some real analysis questions and have hit a boundary, the question is



Consider the sequence:



$$a_n := (-1)^nbiggl( 1 + frac{1}{n^2}biggl) , n in mathbb{N}$$



(a) Find a subsequence $a_{n_k}$ which satifies $a_{n_k}$ $rightarrow$ 1 as n $rightarrow$ $infty$



(b) Find a subequence $a_{m_k}$ which satifies $a_{m_k}$ $rightarrow$ -1 as n $rightarrow$ $infty$



(c) Using results from (a) and (b) prove that the entire sequence cannot converge to a real number



My answer for (a) was $$a_{n_k} := biggl( 1 + frac{1}{n^2}biggl)$$
and (b) was $$a_{m_k} := biggl( -1 - frac{1}{n^2}biggl)$$
However, I am unsure of the proper way to go about proving (c) (other than just saying, two sub-sequences converge to different limits hence the series must be divergent). Any help would be greatly appreciated






real-analysis




real-analysis






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Nov 29 '18 at 2:37









hellothere1hellothere1

101




101












  • $begingroup$
    I don't see a particular reason you can't use that argument. Since the limit of $a_{n_k}$ is not equal to the limit of $a_{m_k}$, it must be divergent. This is because of a known result that if a sequence converges, then all its subsequences converge to the same limit. The contrapositive of this, and thus equivalent, is that if two subsequences converge to different limits, then the sequence itself cannot be convergent.
    $endgroup$
    – Eevee Trainer
    Nov 29 '18 at 2:42












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, i guess i was overthinking a little. a conclusive sentence like that is pretty much what i was looking for
    $endgroup$
    – hellothere1
    Nov 29 '18 at 2:48






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The use of k in your answer makes no sense.
    $endgroup$
    – William Elliot
    Nov 29 '18 at 2:52


















  • $begingroup$
    I don't see a particular reason you can't use that argument. Since the limit of $a_{n_k}$ is not equal to the limit of $a_{m_k}$, it must be divergent. This is because of a known result that if a sequence converges, then all its subsequences converge to the same limit. The contrapositive of this, and thus equivalent, is that if two subsequences converge to different limits, then the sequence itself cannot be convergent.
    $endgroup$
    – Eevee Trainer
    Nov 29 '18 at 2:42












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks, i guess i was overthinking a little. a conclusive sentence like that is pretty much what i was looking for
    $endgroup$
    – hellothere1
    Nov 29 '18 at 2:48






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The use of k in your answer makes no sense.
    $endgroup$
    – William Elliot
    Nov 29 '18 at 2:52
















$begingroup$
I don't see a particular reason you can't use that argument. Since the limit of $a_{n_k}$ is not equal to the limit of $a_{m_k}$, it must be divergent. This is because of a known result that if a sequence converges, then all its subsequences converge to the same limit. The contrapositive of this, and thus equivalent, is that if two subsequences converge to different limits, then the sequence itself cannot be convergent.
$endgroup$
– Eevee Trainer
Nov 29 '18 at 2:42






$begingroup$
I don't see a particular reason you can't use that argument. Since the limit of $a_{n_k}$ is not equal to the limit of $a_{m_k}$, it must be divergent. This is because of a known result that if a sequence converges, then all its subsequences converge to the same limit. The contrapositive of this, and thus equivalent, is that if two subsequences converge to different limits, then the sequence itself cannot be convergent.
$endgroup$
– Eevee Trainer
Nov 29 '18 at 2:42














$begingroup$
Thanks, i guess i was overthinking a little. a conclusive sentence like that is pretty much what i was looking for
$endgroup$
– hellothere1
Nov 29 '18 at 2:48




$begingroup$
Thanks, i guess i was overthinking a little. a conclusive sentence like that is pretty much what i was looking for
$endgroup$
– hellothere1
Nov 29 '18 at 2:48




1




1




$begingroup$
The use of k in your answer makes no sense.
$endgroup$
– William Elliot
Nov 29 '18 at 2:52




$begingroup$
The use of k in your answer makes no sense.
$endgroup$
– William Elliot
Nov 29 '18 at 2:52










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

I think you're on the right track. An approach to this is to make use of the fact that any limit that a sequence converges to must be unique.



Since you have shown in the previous two parts that there are two subsequences that converge to two different limits, I do think that you can automatically conclude that this immediately voids the possibility of the sequence converging.



However, I do think that it may be possible to come up with a 'proof' of sorts (by contradiction):



Assume that the sequence $a_n := (-1)^n (1+frac{1}{n^2})$ converges to a limit, say $a$. This implies that the sequence is a Cauchy sequence. By the definition of a Cauchy sequence, we can set $epsilon = 1$, and make the claim that there exists some $kin mathbb{N}$ such that $forall m,n > k$, that $|a_m - a_n| < epsilon = 1$



So all that is left, is to show that the claim above is false. It is straightforward to do so and we will do this by construction - select $m = 2k, n = 2k+1$, then $a_m$ belongs to the first subsequence that converges to 1, and $a_n$ belongs to the second subsequence that converges to -1.



For completeness:
$$
begin{align}
|a_m - a_n| &= Big|(1 + frac{1}{4k^2}) - (- 1 - frac{1}{(2k+1)^2})Big| \
&= Big|2 + frac{1}{4k^2} + frac{1}{(2k+1)^2}Big| \
&> 2 \
&> 1 = epsilon quad text{(contradiction)}
end{align}
$$
Thus, what we have shown is that the sequence cannot converge, since it is not a Cauchy sequence.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    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
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3018079%2fbasic-real-analysis-two-sub-sequences-converging-to-different-limits%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    0












    $begingroup$

    I think you're on the right track. An approach to this is to make use of the fact that any limit that a sequence converges to must be unique.



    Since you have shown in the previous two parts that there are two subsequences that converge to two different limits, I do think that you can automatically conclude that this immediately voids the possibility of the sequence converging.



    However, I do think that it may be possible to come up with a 'proof' of sorts (by contradiction):



    Assume that the sequence $a_n := (-1)^n (1+frac{1}{n^2})$ converges to a limit, say $a$. This implies that the sequence is a Cauchy sequence. By the definition of a Cauchy sequence, we can set $epsilon = 1$, and make the claim that there exists some $kin mathbb{N}$ such that $forall m,n > k$, that $|a_m - a_n| < epsilon = 1$



    So all that is left, is to show that the claim above is false. It is straightforward to do so and we will do this by construction - select $m = 2k, n = 2k+1$, then $a_m$ belongs to the first subsequence that converges to 1, and $a_n$ belongs to the second subsequence that converges to -1.



    For completeness:
    $$
    begin{align}
    |a_m - a_n| &= Big|(1 + frac{1}{4k^2}) - (- 1 - frac{1}{(2k+1)^2})Big| \
    &= Big|2 + frac{1}{4k^2} + frac{1}{(2k+1)^2}Big| \
    &> 2 \
    &> 1 = epsilon quad text{(contradiction)}
    end{align}
    $$
    Thus, what we have shown is that the sequence cannot converge, since it is not a Cauchy sequence.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      I think you're on the right track. An approach to this is to make use of the fact that any limit that a sequence converges to must be unique.



      Since you have shown in the previous two parts that there are two subsequences that converge to two different limits, I do think that you can automatically conclude that this immediately voids the possibility of the sequence converging.



      However, I do think that it may be possible to come up with a 'proof' of sorts (by contradiction):



      Assume that the sequence $a_n := (-1)^n (1+frac{1}{n^2})$ converges to a limit, say $a$. This implies that the sequence is a Cauchy sequence. By the definition of a Cauchy sequence, we can set $epsilon = 1$, and make the claim that there exists some $kin mathbb{N}$ such that $forall m,n > k$, that $|a_m - a_n| < epsilon = 1$



      So all that is left, is to show that the claim above is false. It is straightforward to do so and we will do this by construction - select $m = 2k, n = 2k+1$, then $a_m$ belongs to the first subsequence that converges to 1, and $a_n$ belongs to the second subsequence that converges to -1.



      For completeness:
      $$
      begin{align}
      |a_m - a_n| &= Big|(1 + frac{1}{4k^2}) - (- 1 - frac{1}{(2k+1)^2})Big| \
      &= Big|2 + frac{1}{4k^2} + frac{1}{(2k+1)^2}Big| \
      &> 2 \
      &> 1 = epsilon quad text{(contradiction)}
      end{align}
      $$
      Thus, what we have shown is that the sequence cannot converge, since it is not a Cauchy sequence.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        I think you're on the right track. An approach to this is to make use of the fact that any limit that a sequence converges to must be unique.



        Since you have shown in the previous two parts that there are two subsequences that converge to two different limits, I do think that you can automatically conclude that this immediately voids the possibility of the sequence converging.



        However, I do think that it may be possible to come up with a 'proof' of sorts (by contradiction):



        Assume that the sequence $a_n := (-1)^n (1+frac{1}{n^2})$ converges to a limit, say $a$. This implies that the sequence is a Cauchy sequence. By the definition of a Cauchy sequence, we can set $epsilon = 1$, and make the claim that there exists some $kin mathbb{N}$ such that $forall m,n > k$, that $|a_m - a_n| < epsilon = 1$



        So all that is left, is to show that the claim above is false. It is straightforward to do so and we will do this by construction - select $m = 2k, n = 2k+1$, then $a_m$ belongs to the first subsequence that converges to 1, and $a_n$ belongs to the second subsequence that converges to -1.



        For completeness:
        $$
        begin{align}
        |a_m - a_n| &= Big|(1 + frac{1}{4k^2}) - (- 1 - frac{1}{(2k+1)^2})Big| \
        &= Big|2 + frac{1}{4k^2} + frac{1}{(2k+1)^2}Big| \
        &> 2 \
        &> 1 = epsilon quad text{(contradiction)}
        end{align}
        $$
        Thus, what we have shown is that the sequence cannot converge, since it is not a Cauchy sequence.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        I think you're on the right track. An approach to this is to make use of the fact that any limit that a sequence converges to must be unique.



        Since you have shown in the previous two parts that there are two subsequences that converge to two different limits, I do think that you can automatically conclude that this immediately voids the possibility of the sequence converging.



        However, I do think that it may be possible to come up with a 'proof' of sorts (by contradiction):



        Assume that the sequence $a_n := (-1)^n (1+frac{1}{n^2})$ converges to a limit, say $a$. This implies that the sequence is a Cauchy sequence. By the definition of a Cauchy sequence, we can set $epsilon = 1$, and make the claim that there exists some $kin mathbb{N}$ such that $forall m,n > k$, that $|a_m - a_n| < epsilon = 1$



        So all that is left, is to show that the claim above is false. It is straightforward to do so and we will do this by construction - select $m = 2k, n = 2k+1$, then $a_m$ belongs to the first subsequence that converges to 1, and $a_n$ belongs to the second subsequence that converges to -1.



        For completeness:
        $$
        begin{align}
        |a_m - a_n| &= Big|(1 + frac{1}{4k^2}) - (- 1 - frac{1}{(2k+1)^2})Big| \
        &= Big|2 + frac{1}{4k^2} + frac{1}{(2k+1)^2}Big| \
        &> 2 \
        &> 1 = epsilon quad text{(contradiction)}
        end{align}
        $$
        Thus, what we have shown is that the sequence cannot converge, since it is not a Cauchy sequence.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Nov 29 '18 at 2:58









        Sean LeeSean Lee

        383111




        383111






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3018079%2fbasic-real-analysis-two-sub-sequences-converging-to-different-limits%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            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







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            How to change which sound is reproduced for terminal bell?

            Image
            3 Recently upgrade to 18.10 from 18.04, and using the terminal is becoming annoying: the new alert sound is a drip ( /usr/share/sounds/gnome/default/alerts/drip.ogg ), and the previous one is still located at ( /usr/share/sounds/ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg ). My issue is that at the gnome-terminal, when autocompleting or pressing left BOTH sounds are reproduced, at the same time. I want to just have ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg active, not both . At the moment I have been only able to reduce the volume of the alerts (but still both are played), or turn the alerts down (but I dislike both "solutions"). gnome-terminal 18.10 teminal-bell share | improve this question
            Read more

            Title Spacing in Bjornstrup Chapter, Removing Chapter Number From Contents

            Image
            up vote 5 down vote favorite 2 I would like to make it so that the vertical space below the title of each chapter is the same when using the Bjornstrup package (i.e. so that the descenders do not affect the spacing - as shown by the red arrow in the picture below). I think I'm fairly happy with the spacing around "A chapter", so I'd really like titles without descenders (e.g. "Contents") to have the same vertical spacing as "A chapter" below the title. I would also like to remove the large "0" in the contents title. Any help appreciated, as always. documentclass[11pt,a4paper]{book} % Packages[![enter image description here][1]][1] usepackage[left=3.5cm, right=3.5cm, top=4.3cm, bottom=4.25cm]{geometry} usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} usepackage{libertine} usepackage[libertine]{newtx
            Read more

            Can I use Tabulator js library in my java Spring + Thymeleaf project?

            Image
            0 I want to add Tabulator js to my java project. I added tabulator.min.js, tabulator.min.css to resources folder. After that added to my html page these dependencies as recommending in readme.md. <link rel="stylesheet" th:href="@{/css/tabulator.min.css}"> <script type="text/javascript" th:src="@{/js/tabulator.min.js}"></script> Now my tables view all elements, that I have in the html page, but not correct. In the documentation of Tabulator is example how to create header and table, var table = new Tabulator("#example-table", { columns:[ {title:"Name", field:"name", sorter:"string", width:200, editor:true}, {title:"Age", field:"age", sorter:"
            Read more