0% found this document useful (0 votes)
36 views4 pages

Divergence Tests in Math 549 Solutions

This document contains proofs of the convergence or divergence of various series using limit comparison tests, ratio tests, root tests, and other convergence tests. The series examined include p-series, logarithmic series, alternating harmonic series, and geometric series. In each proof, the test used and conclusion about convergence or divergence is clearly stated in 1-3 sentences.

Uploaded by

unaza
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
36 views4 pages

Divergence Tests in Math 549 Solutions

This document contains proofs of the convergence or divergence of various series using limit comparison tests, ratio tests, root tests, and other convergence tests. The series examined include p-series, logarithmic series, alternating harmonic series, and geometric series. In each proof, the test used and conclusion about convergence or divergence is clearly stated in 1-3 sentences.

Uploaded by

unaza
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

SOLUTIONS CHAPTER 9.

MATH 549 AU00

1b

Proof. Limit Comparison Test against Σ n1 :


n
(n+1)(n+2) n2 1
lim 1 = lim = lim =1
n
(n + 1)(n + 2) (1 + n )(1 + n2 )
1

hence the series is divergent, since the series Σ n1 is.




2b
1
Proof. Limit Comparison Test against the series Σ 3 :
n2
1 √
1
(n2 (n+1)) 2 n n
lim = lim √
1 =
3 n n+1
n2
r s
n 1
= lim = lim =1
n+1 1 + n1
Since the power at which n appears in the series Σ 13 is bigger than 1, it
n2
means it’s convergent, hence so is our series. 
3a

Proof. Limit Comparison Test against Σ n1 :


1
1 1 1 p −1
(log(n))p n p p l’Hospital pn 1 1
lim 1 = (lim ) = (lim 1 )p = (lim n p )p =
n
log(n) n
p
=∞
Date: 11/04/2000.
1
2 MATH 549 AU00

hence the top series is bigger than the bottom series; but since the bottom
series diverges (Σ n1 ), so does the top; hence our series is divergent.
Another way you can prove this is by using Cauchy’s Condensation
n
Test ... try it out! (lim n2 p = ∞) 

3b

Proof. Try Root Test:


p 1
lim n
log(n)−n = lim =0
n→∞ n→∞ log(n)
hence it’s convergent. 

3c

Proof. Use Cauchy Condensation Test:


1 2n 2
Σ2n n log(2 n) = Σ n
= Σ( )n
log(2 ) n n
but since n2 ≤ 23 for n ≥ 3 we have that, by Comparison Test, that the
above series converges:
1 2
Σ2n < 2 + 1 + Σn≥3 ( )n < ∞
log(2n )log(2n ) 3
so the original series is also convergent. 

Proof.
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2
+ 3 + 2 + ··· < 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + ··· < ∞
1 2 3 1 2 3 4
(we know that the right-hand side is convergent)
For the two tests we need the general formula for the series’ term: a2k =
1 1
(2k)3
and a2k+1 = (2k+1) 2.

The Ratio Test applied here gives two cases:


1
(2k)3 (2k + 1)2
lim 1 = lim =0
k→∞
(2k+1)2
8k 3
SOLUTIONS CHAPTER 9.2 3

and
1
(2k+1)2 8k 3
lim 1 = lim =∞
k→∞
(2k)3
(2k + 1)2
Since we have two subsequences, one that is in the first case of the Ratio
Test (the condition of being less than r) and the other one is in the case
when it’s bigger than 1, we cannot apply this test here.
The Root Test applied here also needs to cases to be looked at:
s
1 1 3 3
lim 2k = lim( 1 ) = 1 = 1
k→∞ (2k)3 (2k) 2k
and s
1 1
lim 2k+1
2
= lim( 1 )2 = 12 = 1
k→∞ (2k + 1) (2k + 1) 2k+1
q q
1 1
and both 2k
(2k)3
and 2k+1 (2k+1) 2 are less than 1. Hence the Root Test

tells us nothing here (we cannot find the r like in the Theorem 9.2.3) 

7a

Proof.
1 1
<
2∗1+1 2
2 2 1
< =
2∗2+1 2∗2 2
..
.
n n 1
< =
2n + 1 2n 2
Multiply all and we get:
1 ∗ 2 ∗ 3 ∗ ··· ∗ n 1 1 1 1
< ∗ ∗ · · · ∗ = n ⇐⇒
3 ∗ 5 ∗ 7 ∗ · · · ∗ (2n + 1) 2 2 2 2
n! 1
⇐⇒ < n
3 ∗ · · · ∗ (2n + 1) 2
so by Comparison Test we get that the series with the above general term
is convergent. 
10

Proof. We have that:


|xn+1 | ≤ r|xn |
|xn+2 | ≤ r|xn+1 | ≤ r2 |xn |
..
.
|xn+k | ≤ r|xn+k−1 | ≤ · · · ≤ rk |xn |
4 MATH 549 AU00

Since
|s − sn | = |xn+1 + xn+2 + . . . | ≤ |xn+1 | + |xn+2 | + · · · ≤
1
≤ r|xn | + r2 |xn | + · · · = |xn |(r + r2 + . . . ) = |xn |r
1−r
done. 
17

Proof. First of all notice that if p > q then the general term is always bigger
than 1
p+1
>1
q+1
p+2
>1
p+2
and so on, and hence
(p + 1)(p + 2) . . . (p + n)
>1
(q + 1)(q + 2) . . . (q + n)
so the series diverges obviously. Same if p = q ... the general term equals 1,
and Σ1 is divergent too.
Let’s restrict our attention now to p < q. Let’s use Raabe’s Test:
(p+1)(p+2)...(p+n+1)
(q+1)(q+2)...(q+n+1)
lim(n(1 − (p+1)(p+2)...(p+n)
)) =
(q+1)(q+2)...(q+n)
p+n+1 q−p n
lim(n(1 − )) = lim(n( )) = (q − p) lim =q−p
q+n+1 q+n+1 q+n+1
We made sure that q − p > 0, so everything is nice and dandy. As by the
test, when q − p > 1 ⇐⇒ q > p + 1 the series is convergent (well, it
says absolutely convergent, but when we talk about positive terms series it’s
equivalent) and when q − p < 1 ⇐⇒ q < p + 1 it’s divergent. There’s only
one more case to discuss, namely q = p + 1:
(p + 1)(p + 2) . . . (p + n) p+1
=
(p + 2)(p + 3) . . . (p + n)(p + n + 1) p+n+1
but by Limit Comparison Test we have that, since
p+1
p+n+1 n(p + 1)
lim 1 = lim =p+1
n→∞
n
p+n+1
the series is behaving same as Σ n1 which is divergent. So this case also gives
us divergence.
Cumulating the results now gives: q > p + 1 convergence, q ≤ p + 1
divergence. 

Common questions

Powered by AI

In p-series, the exponent determines convergence: if the exponent is greater than 1, the series converges; if it is 1 or less, the series diverges. For Σ 1/n^(3/2), the exponent is 3/2, which is greater than 1, thus indicating convergence .

The Limit Comparison Test compares a series to a known series like Σ 1/n by taking the limit of the ratio of their terms. If the limit evaluates to a finite constant, then both series either converge or diverge together. For example, if a series' term ratio to Σ 1/n's term is 1, and since Σ 1/n is divergent, the series under consideration is also divergent .

The Cauchy Condensation Test shows divergence because when decomposing the series, the condition 2n/np = ∞ indicates that the condensed series diverges . On the other hand, applying the Root Test, results in convergence since lim n→∞ 1/log(n) = 0, meaning the condition for convergence is met, while the tests approach the problem from different perspectives .

The Root Test cannot determine convergence in this case because both terms 2k√(1/(2k)^3) and 2k+1√(1/(2k+1)^2) yield values of 1, which means the test is inconclusive and provides no information about r compared to Theorem 9.2.3 .

A comparison test uses a known series to determine another’s convergence. If part of a series is known to have terms that grow slower than a convergent series, it implies convergence for that part. However, if another section grows faster, the test can fail for the entire series; divergence must then be shown separately or an alternative path for convergence must be identified .

L'Hospital's Rule is useful in resolving indeterminate forms like ∞/∞ during series evaluation by differentiating the numerator and denominator. For example, when evaluating lim n → ∞ (n^(1/p) / log(n)), L'Hospital's Rule simplifies the expression, aiding in determining series divergence by resolving into a form that can be compared to a known divergent series .

Raabe’s Test suggests that the convergence or divergence depends on the difference between exponents p and q. If q > p + 1, the series is absolutely convergent; if q ≤ p + 1, the series is divergent. This is derived from evaluating the limit n(q-p)/(q+n+1) as n approaches infinity, and ensuring q-p > 0 for convergence .

The series term simplifies to p+1/(p+n+1), and using the Limit Comparison Test against Σ 1/n, the term behaves like the divergent series Σ 1/n due to the ratio simplifying to a constant ÷ n. Thus, divergence occurs as there's no decay greater than Σ 1/n itself, indicating the series is divergent when p = q + 1 .

Alternating factorial-like terms introduce differing exponents and bases which create conditions unmet consistently by tests like the Root or Ratio Test. These tests often assume uniform behavior, but with alternating terms, each behaves differently under their respective convergence conditions, leading to inconclusive or mixed outcomes .

Subsequences can lead to the Ratio Test being inconclusive if one subsequence satisfies the Ratio Test's condition for convergence (i.e., the limit is less than 1) while another subsequence violates it (i.e., the limit exceeds 1). Therefore, without a consistent limit for the entire sequence, the Ratio Test cannot determine convergence or divergence .

You might also like