Sunday, 16 November 2014

real analysis - Show that if all convergent subsequences of a bounded sequence converge to l, the sequence itself must also converge to l.

Posted here for proof verification and corrections and tips!



Let (an)n=0 be a bounded sequence with the property that there exists l such that if (anj)j=1 is any convergent subsequence of (an)n=0 then its limit is l. Prove that anl as n.




Proof:



(a) (an)n=0 converges:



Suppose that all convergent subsequences of (an)n=0 converge to l, but (an)n=0 itself does not converge. As (an)n=0 is bounded, it cannot diverge to . This means (an)n=0 must be alternating. We can look at the example an=(1)n. It is bounded by [1,1] but not convergent. However, for an=(1)n there exist two convergent subsequences with different limits:



anj=(1)j with j{2n:nN} is constant and converges to l1=1.



ank=(1)k with k{2n1:nN} is constant and converges to l2=1.




This means not all the subsequences anj that are convergent, converge to the same l, so (an)n=0 cannot be alternating and must then be convergent.





(b) (an)n=0 has limit l.



Suppose that all convergent subsequences of (an)n=0 converge to l, but (an)n=0 converges to xl. Then there exists a subsequence (anj)j=1=(1)j with j{n+1:nN} that converges to x, as it follows the original sequence, but starts at one element later. We assumed that xl but all convergent subsequences had limit l, but we just found a convergent subsequence that converges to xl. This means an)n=0 must converge with its unique limit being l.

No comments:

Post a Comment

real analysis - How to find limhrightarrow0fracsin(ha)h

How to find lim without lhopital rule? I know when I use lhopital I easy get $$ \lim_{h\rightarrow 0}...