Prove that limn→∞e−nn∑k=0nkk!=12
This problem appeared on MSE many times, but each time it was solved using Poisson distribution or lots of integrals. I am wondering, is there any way to prove it using some basic properties of limits (their arithmetics, squeeze theorem etc.), definition of ex as limn→∞(1+xn)n, basic limits with e, binomial expansion and logarithms, but without using integrals, series, Stirling formula, asymptotics, Taylor series?
This problem was given to me by my mathematical analysis teacher, but it's not a homework, just additional problem to think on. My teacher claims it can be solved with knowledge introduced on lectures so far, which is not much, mainly things mentioned above. Of course, I can use theorems not mentioned on the lectures, but then I have to prove them, and again, with the baisc knowledge. I've been thinking about it for a few days and couldn't do any major progress in my attempts.
Answer
Table of Content.
- Heuristic argument
- Elementary proof, version 1.
- Elementary proof, version 2. (NEW!)
Although far from being rigorous, one can provide a heuristic computation which explains why we expect the answer to be 12. Notice that
nn+j/(n+j)!nn/n!={∏jk=1nn+k,j≥11,j=0,−1∏−j−1k=1n−kn,j≤−2
In any of cases, taking logarithm and applying the approximation log(1+x)≈x shows that the above quantity is approximately e−j2/2n. So
e−nn∑k=0nkk!=∑0j=−nn!nn√nnn+j(n+j)!∑∞j=−nn!nn√nnn+j(n+j)!≈∑0j=−ne−(j/√n)2/21√n∑∞j=−ne−(j/√n)2/21√n≈∫0−∞e−x2/2dx∫∞−∞e−x2/2dx=12.
Most of the solutions that I know is more or less a rigorous realization of this kind of observation, and so, it is either involved or requiring extra knowledge.
Define An, Bn and Cn by
An:=e−nn∑k=0nkk!,Bn:=e−n∞∑k=n+1nkk!,Cn=nne−nn!.
From the Taylor expansion of the exponential function, we know that An+Bn=1. In order to show the desired convergence, it suffices to show that the following claim holds.
Claim. An/Bn→1 as n→∞.
Indeed, once this is proved, then both An and Bn converge to 12 as n→∞.
Proof of Claim. Using the substitution k=n−j followed by p=j−1, one may write
AnCn=n∑j=0n!(n−j)!nj=2+n−1∑p=1p∏l=1(1−ln).
Similarly, applying the substitution k=n+p, one may write
BnCn=∞∑p=1n!np(n+p)!=∞∑p=1p∏l=1(11+ln).
1. Estimation of leading sums. Fix α∈(0,13) and set N=N(α)=⌈n(1+α)/2⌉. Then using the asymptotic formula 1+x=ex+O(x2) as x→0, for 1≤p≤N we have
p∏l=1(1−ln)=exp{−p22n+O(n−(1−3α)/2)}=p∏l=1(11+ln).
In particular, there exists a constant C>0, depending only on α, such that
max{N∏l=1(1−ln),N∏l=1(11+ln)}≤Ce−12nα.
2. Estimation of tail sums. In this time, consider p>N. Then we have
p∏l=1(1−ln)≤Ce−12nα(1−Nn)p−Nandp∏l=1(11+ln)≤Ce−12nα(11+Nn)p−N.
So the tail sum for An/Cn can be bounded from above by
n−1∑p=N+1p∏l=1(1−ln)≤Ce−12nα∞∑k=0(1−Nn)k≤CnNe−12nα≤Cn(1−α)/2e−12nα,
and likewise,
∞∑p=N+1p∏l=1(11+ln)≤Ce−12nα∞∑k=0(1−NN+n)k≤2CnNe−12nα≤2Cn(1−α)/2e−12nα.
3. Conclusion. Combining altogether,
AnBn=(1+o(1))∑Np=1e−p22n+O(1)(1+o(1))∑Np=1e−p22n+o(1),
which can be easily shown to converge to 1 as n→∞, since ∑Np=1e−p22n≥√ne−1/2→∞ as n→∞. (In fact, this sum is (1+o(1))√πn/2 as n→∞.)
In this answer, we do appeal to the concentration behavior of the sum, but rather utilize a mysterious identity from combinatorics.
Write An=e−n∑nk=0nkk! for the sequence of our interest. We also introduce the following auxiliary sequences:
an=nnn!en,bn=(−1)n(−1/2n)=14n(2nn),
Before proceeding, we make some observations. The key ingredients are the following identities
An=n∑k=0akan−k,1=n∑k=0bkbn−k.
The former one is quite non-trivial, and a proof can be found here. On the other hand, the latter one is easily proved by comparing both sides of ∑∞n=0xn=11−x=(1√1−x)2=(∑∞n=0bnxn)2. Next, we have the following observation.
Lemma. anbn→1√2 as n→∞.
This lemma tells that, roughly akan−k≈12bkbn−k and hence An≈12∑nk=0bkbn−k=12. Indeed, this is an instance of the philosophy that `limit should be preserved under averaging', and so, it can be proved by a standard machinery. We separate the rigorous claim into a standalone result:
Proposition. Let (an),(bn) be sequences in (0,∞) such that
- an/bn→ℓ∈(0,∞);
- bn→0 as n→∞;
- ∑nk=0bkbn−k=1 for all n.
Then ∑nk=0akan−k→ℓ2 as n→∞.
Therefore, An→12 is a direct consequence of this proposition together with the well-known fact that bn→0. Indeed, this can be proved as follows:
b2n=(1⋅3⋯(2n−1)2⋅4⋯(2n))2=(1⋅32⋅2)(3⋅54⋅4)⋯((2n−3)(2n−1)(2n−2)(2n−2))2n−14n2≤12n.
Finally, we prove the claims above.
Proof of Lemma. Using the identity −∫10ua+udu=alog(a+1)−aloga−1 for a>0, we notice that
−n∑k=1∫10un+k−1+udu=n∑k=1[(n+k−1)log(n+k)−(n+k−1)log(n+k−1)−1]=(2n)log(2n)−nlogn−n−n∑k=1log(n+k)=log[(4ne)nn!(2n)!]=log(anbn).
Then, using 12(n+k)≤∫10un+k−1+udu≤12(n+k−1), we obtain
−12n∑k=11n+k−1≤log(anbn)≤−12n∑k=11n+k.
Therefore the conclusion follows from the well-known limit ∑nk=111+kn1n→∫10dx1+x=log2.
Proof of Proposition. Let α,β satisfy 0<α<ℓ<β. Then there exists N such that α≤anbn≤β for all n≥N. So, if n≥2N, then
α2n−N∑k=Nbkbn−k≤n−N∑k=Nakan−k≤β2n−N∑k=Nbkbn−k.
Now let M>0 be a bound of an/bn. Since bn→0 as n→∞, we have
N−1∑k=0akan−k+n∑k=n−N+1akan−k=2N−1∑k=0akan−k≤2M2N−1∑k=0bkbn−k→n→∞0
Combining altogether and using 1=∑nk=0bkbn−k,
α2≤lim infn→∞n∑k=0akan−k≤lim supn→∞n∑k=0akan−k≤β2.
Letting α↑ℓ and β↓ℓ proves the desired identity.
We conclude with some remarks.
Remark. If we do not care about elementary solution, this approach can be simplified by showing that
- An is bounded and decreasing, hence converges.
By the identity An=∑nk=0akan−k, we have
(1−x)∞∑n=0Anxn=(∑∞n=0anxn∑∞n=0bnxn)2,
hence by a version of abelian theorem, we obtain
limn→∞An=limn→∞(anbn)2=12.
No comments:
Post a Comment