Series of Real Numbers

Introduction (Series of Real Numbers)

A finite series is given by the terms of a finite sequence, added

together. For example, we could take the finite sequence
(2k + 1)10k=1 
Then the corresponding example of a finite series would be given
by all of these terms added together,
3 + 5 + 7 + .... + 21
We can write this sum more concisely using sigma notation. We
write the capital Greek letter sigma, and then the rule for the kth
term. Below the sigma we write ‘k = V . Above the sigma we write
the value of k for the last term in the sum, which in this case is 10.
So in this case we would have

and in this case the sum of the series is equal to 120

In the easy way, an infinite series is the sum of the terms of an
infinite sequence. An example of an infinite sequence is

And then the series obtained from this sequence would be

With a sum going on forever. Once again we can use sigma

notation to express this series. We write down the sigma sign and
the rule for the k-th term. But now we put the symbol for infinity
above the sigma, to show that we are adding up an infinite number
of terms. In this case we would have

Key points: A finite series is given by all the terms of a finite

sequence, added together.
A infinite series is given by all the terms of an infinite sequence,
added together.
Definition
An expression of the form a 1 + a2 + a3 + ... + a n + ... where each
an is a real number, is called an infinite series of real numbers and

is denoted by   an or ∑ an.an is called the nth term of the series
∑ an.

Example 1: 

Example 2:   is a n infinite series- The

sequence of partial sums looks like:

We saw above that this sequence converges to 2, so

Example 3: The number n!, read n factorial, is defined as the

product of the first n positive integers; 
n! = 1 - 2 ..... n
<n!> is an important sequence. Its first few terms are
1, 2, 6, 24, 120, 720, ...
By convention, 0! is defined by 0! = 1.

 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + .... =   

 1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 + .... =  1/n

 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + ... =  1/2n

 1 + 1/4 + 1/9 + 1/16 + ... =  1/n2

  1- 1 + 1- 1 + 1 - 1 + ... =  (-1)n

Sequence of Partial Sums of Series

Recall : A sequence {a n} is a function which assigns a real number

an to each natural number n : 1, 2, 3, 4, 5......i.e., a sequence is an
ordered list of real numbers : a 1, a2, a3, a4, a5, ...,

Example 1:   generates the sequence 

Definition: An infinite series   an is the sum of the numbers in

the sequence {a n}, i.e.,   an = a1 + a2 + a3 + a4 + a5 + ... .

Example 2:   

We need a more precise definition of an infinite series   an. Begin

by constructing a new sequence of partial sums by letting (This
step by step by step process will be called the Sequence of Partial

Sums Test for the infinite series  an.)

S1 = a1,
S2 = a1 + a2,
S3 = a1 + a2 + a3,
S4 = a1 + a2 + a3 + a4,
Sn = a1 + a2 + a3 + a4 + ... + a n.
We can now say that the value of the infinite series is precisely the
value of the limit of its sequence of partial sums, i.e.,

 an = a1 + a2 + a3 + a4 + ....

=   (a1 + a2 + a3 + a4 + ... + an)
=   Sn.

Examples of Partial Sums

For the sequence 1, 1, 1, 1,..., we have  1 = N → ∞. Thus,  is

divergent.
For the sequence 1, -1, 1, -1,..., we have S 1 = 1, S2 = 0, S3 = 1, etc.

In general , S N = 1 for N odd and S N = 0 for N even. Thus,  (-1)n is
oscillatory.

The Harmonic Series

If one computes the partial sums for   1/n one finds S 1 = 1, S2 =
3/2 = 1.5, S 3 = 11/6 ≈ 1.87, S 10 ≈ 2/93, S 20 ≈ 3.40, S 1000 ≈ 7.49,

S100,000  ≈ 12.09. If fact, S N → ∞ So that   1/n diverges.

If one computes the partial sums for   1/n2, then one obtains S 1 =
1, S2 = 5/4 = 1.25, S 3 = 49/36 ≈ 1.36, S 10 ≈ 1.55, S 100 ≈ 1.63, S1000  ≈
1.64.

In fact, 1/n2 = (2) = π 2/6 ≈ 1.644934068

Definitions
  A series ∑ a n is said to be convergent, if the sequence <s n> of
partial sums of ∑ a n is convergent. If  Sn = s, then S is

called the sum of the series ∑ a n. We write S =  an.

 The series ∑ a n is said to be divergent, if the sequence <S n>
of partial sums of ∑ a n is divergent,.
 The series ∑ an is said to oscillate, if the sequence <S n> of
partial sums of ∑ a n oscillates.

Example : (Geometric series) The series 1 + r + r 2 + r3 + ... (r > 0)

converges if r < 1 and diverges if r > 1.

Convergence of a Geometric Series

a geometric series with ratio r diverges if Irl ≥ 1. If 0 < Irl <1, then
the series converges to the sum

Proof: It is easy to see that the series oscillates if r = ±1. then s n =
a + ar +ar2 + .... + ar n- 1. multiplication by r yields
rSn = ar + ar2 +... +arn.
Subtracting the second equation from the first produces S n - rSn = a
- ar2. Therefore. S n (1 - r) = a(1 - r n). and the partial sum is

If 0 < Irl < 1, it follows that r n → 0 as n → ∞, and you obtain

which means that series converges and its sum is a/(1 - r). It is left
to you to show that the series diverges if Irl > 1.
Example can be given, such as a n = n is an unbounded sequence
with no limit point and a n = 1, if n is even; a n = n, if n is odd is an
unbounded sequence with a limit point 1.

Example 1: The series ∑ (- 1) n-1 oscillates.

Example 2: Perform the following index shifts.

(a) Write  arn-1 as a series that starts at n = 0.

(b) Write   as a series that starts at n = 3.

Solution:
(a) In this case we need to decrease the initial value by 1 and so
the n in the term must increase by 1 as well.

 arn-1 =   ar(n+1)-1 =  arn

(b) For this problem we want to increase the initial value by 2 and
so all the n's in the series terms must decrease by 2.

Note: The nature of a series is not affected by the addition,

alteration or omission of a finite number of terms or by
multiplication of all the terms by a fixed non-zero number.
(a) ∑ (un ± vn) = s ± t
(b) ∑ kun = ks, k ∈ R

Example 3: Convergent and Divergent Geometric Series

(a) The geometric series

has a ratio of r = 1/2 with a = 3, Because 0 < Irl < 1, the series
converges and its sum is

(b) The geometric series

has a ratio of r = 3/2. Because Irl ≥ 1. the series diverge.

Example 4: A Geometric Series for a Repeating Decimal

Use a geometric series to write   as the ratio of two integers.
Solution: For the repeating decimal  , you can write

For this series, you have a = 8/10 2 and r = 1/10 2. So.

Theorem : Limit of nth Term of a Convergent Series

If  an converges, then  an = 0.

Proof: Assume that

 an =   Sn = L
Then, because S n = Sn-1 + an and 
it follows that

which implies that {a n} converges to 0.

Theorem : nth Term Test for Divergence
If

Example 5: Using the nth Term Test for Divergence

(a) For the series  2n. we have

So, the limit of the nth term is not 0 and the series diverges.
(b) For the series   .

So, the limit of the nth term is not 0 and the series diverges.

(c) For the series   1/n, we have

 1/n = 0
Because the limit of the nth term is 0. The nth-Term Test for
Divergence does not apply and you can draw no conclusion about
convergence or divergence.

Tests of Convergence of Series

Some important comparison series

1. Geometric series
∑un = 1 + r + r 2 + r3 + ... + rn-1 + rn + ....

 is convergent, when    I r I < 1

 is divergent, when    r ≥ 1
 is oscillating finitely, when r = -1
 is oscillating infinitely, when r < -1

2. Hyperharmonic series (or p-series)

 is convergent when p > 1

 is divergent, when p ≤ 1

3. The Auxiliary Series

The series   is convergent if p > 1 and

divergent if p ≤ 1.

Comparison Test
Test I. First Comparison Test
Let ∑u n and ∑vn be two positive term series such that
un ≤ k vn   ∀ n ≥ m.        ...(1)
(k being a fixed positive number and m a fixed positive integers)
Then
(i) ∑vn converges  ⇒  ∑un converges.
(ii) ∑u n diverges   ⇒ ∑un diverges.
Proof: Let <Sn> and <Tn> be the sequence of partial sums of the
series ∑un and ∑vn respectively.
For n ≥ m, we have
Sn - Sm = (u1 + u2 + ... + um + um+1 + um+2 + ... + u n) - (u 1 + u2 + ... +
u m)
or Sn - Sm = um+1 + um+2 + ... + un.          ... (2)
Similarly,
Tn - Tm = vm+1 + vm+2 + ... + vn.        .... (3)
From (1) and (2), we obtain
Sn - Sm ≤ k (vm+1 + vm+2 + ...vn)
or Sn - Sm ≤ k (Tn - Tm) using (3)
or Sn ≤ k Tn +a,                  ... (4)
where a = S m - k Tm is a fixed number.
(i) Suppose ∑ v n converges.
The sequence <T n> of partial sums of ∑v n is bounded above i.e.,
there exists a positive real number t such that
Tn ≤ t   ∀ n.          ...(5)
From (4) and (5),
Sn ≤ kt + a   ∀   n.
Thus the sequence <S n> of partial sums of ∑u n is bounded above
and so ∑u n is convergent.
(ii) Suppose ∑un diverges.
Then   Sn = + ∞            .... (6)
From (4) and (6), we obtain

It follows that the sequence <T n> of partial sums of the series
∑un diverges and so ∑v n diverges.
Example 1: Test for convergence the series:

(i)   1/logn,

(ii)   1/n2logn
Solution: (i) We know log n < n for all n ≥ 2.

∴ 

Since ∑1/n diverges, so by First Comparison Test,  1/log n,

diverges.

(ii) We know 

Since ∑1/n converges, so by First Comparison Test,   

converges

Example 2: Test for the convergence of the series:

Solution: We that n ! ≥ 2 n-1 ∀ n ≥ 2.

∴ 
Now

 being a geometric series with common ratio 1/2

< 1 is convergent. Hence, by First Comparison Test, ∑1/n! is
convergent.
Test II. Second Comparison Test
If ∑un and ∑vn are two positive term series such that

     ....(1)
Then
(i) ∑vn converges   ⇒ ∑un converges,
(ii) ∑un diverges    ⇒ ∑vn diverges,
Proof: For n ≥ m, we have

Thus

∴ un ≤ k  vn  ∀  n ≥ m,        ....(2)

where k = u m/vm is a fixed positive number.
(i) ∑vn converges  ⇒  ∑un converges,
(ii) ∑u n diverges    ⇒ ∑vn diverges.
Test III. Limit Form Test
Let ∑u n and ∑vn be two positive term series such that

(I is finite and non-zero).

Then ∑un and ∑vn converge or diverge together.

Proof: Since un/vn > 0 for all n, so 

Thus / > 0, as / ≠ 0
Let ε > 0 be some number such that / - ε > 0.
Since   un/vn = /, so there exists a positive integer m such that

or / - ε < un/vn < / + ε ∀ n ≥ m, where v n > 0 ∀ n.

∴ (/ - ε) vn < un < (/ + ε) vn   ∀ n ≥ m.         ....(1)
From (1), we consider
un < (/ - ε) vn ∀ n ≥ m.         ....(2)
(Here / + ε is a fixed positive number)
Applying First Comparison Test in (2), we obtain

   ... (A)
From (1), we consider
(/ - ε) vn < un ∀ n ≥ m
or vn < kun  ∀ n ≥ m,           ....(3)
where k = 1// - ε > 0 is a fixed number.
Applying First Comparison Test in (3), we obtain

  ...(b)
From (A) and (B), it follows that
∑un converges    ⇔         ∑vn converges,
∑vn diverges       ⇔          ∑vn diverges.
Hence the two series ∑u n and ∑vn converge or diverge together.
Remark

 In order to apply the Limit form test to a given series ∑un, we

have to select a series ∑vn (which is usually a p-series) in
which the nth term of vn behaves as u n, for large values of n.

Example 3: Test each of the following series for convergence:

(i) 

(ii) 
Solution:

(i) 

The nth term of this series of 

So ∑un and ∑vn converge or diverge together (Limit From Test).

Since   converges, so ∑u n converges.

(ii) 

The nth term is 

Now   and finite.

So ∑un and ∑vn converge or diverge together.
Since ∑vn = ∑1/n diverges, so ∑u n diverges.

Example 4: Test for convergence the series

Solution: We have

Let

Now
So ∑un and ∑vn converge or diverge together.

Example 5: Test for converges the series

Solution: We have

Let

So ∑un and ∑vn converge or diverge together.

Since ∑vn = E 1/n2 converges, so the given series ∑u n also
converges.

Example 6: Test for convergence the series whose n th term is

Solution:

or

Let

so that ∑v n converges.
Now
So ∑un and ∑vn converge or diverge together.
Since ∑vn converges, so the given series ∑u n also converges.

Example 7: Test for the convergence of the series:

Solution: 

or

Let

Now

So ∑un and ∑vn converge or diverge together.

Since ∑vn converges, so the given series ∑u n converges.

Example 8: Test for the convergence of the series whose n*

term is
{(n3 + 1)1/3 - n}.
Solution: Let
Now

So ∑un and ∑vn converge or diverge together.

Since ∑vn converges, so ∑u n converges.

Example 9: Test for convergence the series

Solution: The nth term of the given series is

Let

So ∑un and ∑vn converge or diverge together.

Since ∑vn = ∑1/n5/2 converges, so the given series converges.

Example 10: Test the convergence of the series S  .

Solution: We have
Then

Thus the two series ∑u n and ∑vn converge or diverge together.

Since ∑vn = ∑1/n diverges, so the given series ∑u n diverges.

Example 11: Show that the series  converges.

Solution: The nth term of the given series is

∴  un/vn = 1, so that ∑u n and ∑vn converge or diverge together.

Since ∑vn = ∑1/n2 converges, so the given series ∑u n also
converges.

Example 12: Show that the series 1 + a + b + a 2 + b2 + a3 +

b3 + ..., 0 < a < b < 1 is convergent.
Solution: Since 0 < a < b < 1, a n < bn ∀ n ≥ 0.
Since ∑b n is a geometric series with common ratio b, 0 < b < 1 ;
∑bn is convergent. Hence, by First comparison test, the given
series ∑un is convergent.

Ratio Test

Test IV. D'Alembert’s Ratio Test

Let ∑u n be a positive terms series such that

  ... (1)
Then
(i) ∑un converges if / > 1,
(ii) ∑u n diverges if /< 1.
Test fails if / = 1.
Proof. Case I. Let / > 1.
We can choose some ε > 0 such that / - ε > 1 or α > 1, α = / - ε.
Using (1), there exists a positive integer m 1 such that

Consider

or

    ...(2)
where

 , being a geometric series with common ratio

1/α < 1, is convergent.
Hence ∑un is convergent (by Second Comparison Test is applied in
(2)).
Case II. Let / < 1.
We can choose another ε > 0 such that / + ε < 1
β < 1, β = / + ε.
Using (1), there exists a positive integer m 2 such that

or

Consider
or

       ....(3)
n
where ∑vn = ∑1/β , being a geometric series with common ratio 1/β
> 1, is divergent. Hence, by Second Comparison Test as applied in
(3), ∑un is divergent.
Case III. We shall give examples of two series : one convergent
and the other divergent but both satisfying

The series ∑u n = ∑1/n is divergent, but

The series ∑u n = ∑1/n2 is convergent, but

Remark 1: Another equivalent form of Ratio Test is as follows:

If ∑un is a positive term series such that

         ...(1)
Then
(i) ∑un is convergent if / < 1.
(ii) ∑u n is divergent if / > 1.

Proof: We have   m, where m = 1//.

Then ∑un converges if m > 1    ⇒    1// > 1 ⇒ / < 1,
and ∑u n converges if m < 1    ⇒ 1// < 1 ⇒ / < 1.
Remark 2 : If ∑un is a positive term series such that

then ∑un is convergent.

Proof : It is given that the sequence   diverges to ∞.

So there exists a positive integer m such that
or

where ∑vn = ∑1/2 n, being a geometric series with common ratio 1/2
<1, is convergent. Hence, by Second Comparison Test, ∑u n is
convergent.
Remark 3: If ∑un is a positive term series such that

then ∑un is convergent.

Proof : For ε = 1/2, there exists a positive integer m such that

The result now follows by Remark 2.

Example 1: Test for the convergence of the series:

Solution: Let

By applying ratio test -

Example 2: Test for convergence the series

Solution: We have
∴ 
By Ratio Test, the given series diverges.

Example 3: Test for convergence the series

(i) 

(ii) 
Solution: 

(i) 

∴ 
By Ratio Test, ∑u n converges of 1/x > 1 i.e., x < 1 and ∑u n diverges
if 1/x < 1 i.e., x > 1. The test fails for x = 1.
For

∴ 
So ∑un and ∑vn converge or diverge together.
Since ∑vn = ∑1/n2 converges, so ∑u n converges (for x = 1).
Hence the given series converges for x ≤ 1 and diverges for x > 1.
(ii) We have

∴ 
By Ratio Test, the given series converges if 1/x > 1 i.e., x < 1 and
diverges if 1/x < 1 i.e., x > 1. The test fails for x = 1.

For x = 1, un = 
Let
Now

So ∑un and ∑vn converge or diverge together. Since

∑vn converges, therefore ∑u n also converges (for x = 1).
Hence the given series converges for x ≤ 1 and diverges for x > 1.

Example 4: Test for the convergence of the series:

(i) 

(ii) 

(iii) 
Solution:

(i) 

∴ 
By Ratio Test, ∑u n converges if 1/x 2 > 1 i.e., x 2 < 1 i.e., x < 1 and
diverges if x 2 > 1 i.e., x > 1. The test fails if x = 1.
For x = 1,

Let

Then
Since ∑vn = ∑1/√n diverges, so ∑u n diverges (for x = 1).
Hence the given series converges if x < 1 and diverges if x ≥ 1.
(ii) We have

∴ 
By Ratio Test, ∑u n converges if 1/x > 1 i.e., x < 1 and diverges if x
> 1. The test fails if x = 1.
For x = 1,

Let

∴ 
Since ∑vn = ∑1/n√n converges, so ∑u n converges (for x = 1).
Hence the given series converges if x ≤ 1 and diverges if x > 1.
(iii) We have

By Ratio Test, ∑u n converges if 1/x > 1 i.e., x < 1 and diverges if x

> 1. The test fails if x = 1.
For x = 1,

Let
As done in part (ii), ∑u n converges if x = 1.
Hence the given series converges if x ≤ 1 and diverges if x > 1.

Example 5: Test for convergence the series:

(i)  for all Positive values of x.

(ii) 
Solution:

(i) 
Now

∴ 
Hence, by Ratio Test, ∑u n converges.

(ii) We have 

∴ 
By Ratio test, ∑u n converges if 1/x > i.e., x < 1 and diverges if 1/x <
1 i.e., x > 1. For x = 1, we have

∴ 
So the given series diverges for x = 1. Hence the given series
converges if x < 1 and diverges if x ≥ 1.
Example 6: Test for convergence the series:

for all positive values of x.

Solution: Ignoring the first term of the series, we have

∴ 
By Ratio Test, ∑u n converges if 1/x > 1 i.e., x < 1 and ∑u n diverges
if x > 1. Ratio Test fails if x = 1.
For x = 1,

Clearly,

Since ∑1/n 2 converges, so by First Comparison Test, 

converges.
Hence ∑un converges for x ≤ 1 and diverges for x > 1.

Example 7: Test for convergence the series with n th term:

(i) 

(ii) 
Solution: 

(i) 

∴ 
∴   By Ratio Test, the given series converges if 1/x > 1
i.e., x < 1 and diverges if x > 1. The test fails if x = 1.
For

Let

So ∑un and ∑vn converge or diverge together.

Since ∑vn diverges, so ∑u n diverges (for x = 1).
Hence the given series converges if x < 1 and diverges if x ≥ 1.

(ii) 

∴ 
By Ratio Test, the given series converges if 1/x > i.e., x < 1 and
diverges if 1/x < 1 i.e., x > 1. The test fails if x = 1.
For x = 1,

Let

∴ 
So ∑un and ∑vn converge or diverge together.
Since ∑vn = ∑1/n diverges, so ∑u n diverges (for x = 1).
Hence the given series converges if x < 1 and diverges if x ≥ 1.

Example 8: Test for the convergence of the series

Solution: We have

∴ 

 Hence ∑un is convergent, by Ratio Test.

Example 9: Test for the convergence of the series:

Solution: Ignoring the first term, we have

∴ 

By Ratio Test, ∑u n converges if 1/x > 1 i.e., x < 1 and diverges if x

> 1. Ratio Test fails if x = 1.
For x = 1,

i.e. un = 1 ≠ 0. So ∑u n diverges for x = 1.

Hence ∑un converges if x < 1 and diverges if x ≥ 1.

Raabe’s Test
Let ∑u n be a positive term series such that

Then (i) ∑un converges if / > 1, (ii) ∑u n diverges if / < 1.

The test fails if / = 1.
Note: Raabe's test is applied when D'Alembert's ratio test fails
Proof. Case I. Let / > 1.
We can choose some ε > 0 such that / — ε > 1 or α > 1, α = / - ε.
From (1), there exists a positive integer m such that

or

Consider

or nun - nun+1 > α un+1   ∀ n ≥ m

or nun - (n + 1)u n + 1 > (α - 1) u n + 1 ∀ n ≥ m.
Putting n = m, m + 1, m + 2, .... n - 1 and adding, we get
mum - nun > (α - 1) (u m+1 + um+2 + ... + u n)
or (α - 1) (S n - Sm) <mum - num < mum,  (where Sn = u1 + u2 + ... +
um + um+1 + ... + un)
Thus
Sn < Sm + m/α-1 um ∀ n.
where Sm + m/α - 1 um is a fixed positive number.
It follows that the sequence <S n> is bounded above and so the
given series is convergent.
Case II. Let / < 1.
We can choose another ε > 0 such that / + ε < 1.
From (1), there exists a positive integer m 1 such that

Since
or

or

Since ∑vn = ∑1/n diverges, so by Second Comparison Test,

∑un diverges.

Case III. Consider the two series   and   where the

first series is divergent and the second series is convergent but for
both the series

Remark: Raabe’s Test is applied when D’Alembert’s ratio fails.

When Ratio test fails i.e., when   Raabe’s test may be

applied.

Example 1: Test for convergence the series:

(i) 

(ii) 
Solution:

(i) 

∴ 
By Ratio Test, ∑u n converges if 1/x > 1 i.e., x < 1 and diverges if x
> 1. The test fails if x = 1. We shall now apply Raabe’s Test.
For

∴ 

⇒ 
By Raabe’s Test, ∑u n converges (for x = 1).
Hence the given series converges for x ≤ 1 and diverges for x > 1.

(ii) 

∴ 
By Ratio Test, ∑u n converges if 1/x > 1 i.e., x < 1 and diverges if x
> 1. The test fails if x = 1.
For x = 1,

now,

∴ 
By Raabe’s Test, ∑u n diverges (for x = 1)
Hence the given series converges for x < 1 and diverges for x ≥ 1.

Example 2: Examine the convergence of the following series:

(i) 

(ii) 
Solution: (i) We have

∴ 
By Ratio test, ∑u n converges if 1/x 2 > 1 i.e., x < 1 (as x > 0) and
diverges if x > 1. The test fails for x = 1.
For x = 1,

∴ 
By Raabe’s test, ∑u n converges (for x = 1).
Hence the given series converges for x ≤ 1 and diverges for x > 1.

(ii) 

∴ 
By Ratio test, ∑u n converges if 1/x 2 > 1 i.e., x < 1 (as x > 0) and
diverges if x > 1. The test fails for x = 1.
For x = 1,

Now

∴ 
By Raabe’s Test, ∑u n converges (for x = 1).
Hence the given series converges for x ≤ 1 and diverges for x > 1.

(ii) 

∴ 
By Ratio test, ∑u n converges if 1/x 2 > 1 i.e., x < 1 (as x > 0) and
diverges if x = 1.
For x = 1,

Now

and

By Raabe’s Test, ∑u n converges (for x = 1).

Hence the given series converges for x ≤ 1 and diverges for x > 1.

Example 3: Test for convergence the series:

Solution: On ignoring the first term, we have

∴ 
Thus Ratio test fails. We shall now apply Raabe’s test.

∴ 
Hence, the given series is divergent.

De Morgan and Bertrand’s Test

If ∑un be a series of positive terms; such that:

(i) if / > 1, ∑un is convergent

(ii) (ii) if / > 1, ∑u n is divergent
Proof: In which follows, we shall compare ∑u n with the auxiliary
series

which is known to be convergent if p > 1 and divergent if p ≤ 1.

Now, we have
Thus

   ...(1)
Case (i). Let / > 1. Choose a number p such that / ≥ p > 1.
By comparison test of the second type the series ∑u n will be
convergent if there exists a positive integer m such that [ n ≥ m

 n ≥ p + terms containing n or log n in the

denominator ...(2)
Taking limits on both sides of (2) as n → ∞ we get

⇒ / > p ⇒ I > 1 a s p > 1.

Thus, ∑un converges if / > 1.
Case (ii). Proceed as in case (i) yourself.

Logarithmic Ratio Test

If ∑un be a series of positive terms; such that:

(i) if / > 1, ∑un is convergent

(ii) if / > 1, ∑un is divergent
(iii) if / > 1, ∑u n may converge or diverge. So test fails.
Proof: Let / > 1 and let us choose ε > 0 such that / - ε > 1. Let / - ε
= λ so that / > 1.
Now

⇒ there exists a positive integer m such that

⇒ 
⇒ un/un+1 > eλ/n, [ n ≥ m         ...(1)
We now that the sequence <(1 + 1/n) n> converges to e and hence
e ≥ (1 + 1/n) n, [ n ∈ N
⇒ eλ/n ≥ (1 + 1/n) λ         ... (2)
From (1) and (2), we have

    ...(3)
λ
where vn = 1/n .
Since λ > 1, so ∑v n converges. Then, using comparison test of
second type it follows that the given series ∑u n also converges.
(ii) Prove as in part (i).
Note 1. The above Logarithmic test is alternative to Raabe’s test
and should be used when D'Alembert’s ratio test fails and when
either e occurs in u n/un+1 or n occurs as an exponent in u n/un+1.
Note 2. When Raabe's test fails we may use De Morgan’s and
Bertrand’s test given below. Again, when logarithmic test fails we
may use second logarithmic ratio test.

Second Logarithmic Ratio Tests

Let ∑u n be a series of positive terms such that

Then the series is

(i) convergent if / > 1
(ii) divergent if / < 1
(iii) no other decision is possible if / = 1.
Proof: In what follows, we shall compare ∑u n with the auxiliary
series

which is known (refer Art.) to be convergent if p > 1 and divergent if

p ≤ 1. Now, we have

by binomial theorem
Thus
    .... (1)
Case (i). Let / > 1. Choose a number p such that / ≥ p > 1.
By comparison test of the second type, the series ∑u n will be
convergent if there exists a positive integer m such that [ n > m

[ ∵ log (1 + x) = x - x 2/2 + x3/3 + .... ]

or / ≥ p. But p > 1, so / > 1.

Hence the given series ∑u n converges if / > 1.
(ii) Proceed as in case (i) yourself.
Example 1: Examine the convergence of the following series:

(i) 
(ii) 

(iii) 

(iv) 
Solution: (i) Here, we have

Here

Hence ratio test fails and we now apply Raabe’s test.

(ii) 

∴      ....(1)
and

Hence by ratio test, ∑u n converges if 1/x 2 > 1, i.e., x 2 < 1, i.e., x < 1
(as x > 0) and diverges if 1/x 2 < 1, i.e., x 2 > 1, i.e., x > 1. The test
fails if x = 1. In that case, from (1), we have

∴ 
and hence
Hence, by Raabe’s test, ∑u n is convergent.
Thus the given series converges if x ≤ 1 and diverges if x > 1.
(iii) Omitting the first term of the given series as it will not change
the nature of the series, we obtain

∴         ...(1)
Now

∴ By ratio test ∑u n converges if 1/x 2 > 1, i.e., if x 2 < 1 and diverges

if 1/x2 < 1, i.e., if x 2 > 1. When 1/x 2 = 1, i.e., x 2 = 1, the ratio test
fails. We shall now apply Raabe’s test.
From (1), for x 2 = 1,

∴ 
Hence, by Raabe’s test, ∑u n converges for x 2 = 1.
Thus the given series converges if x 2 ≤ 1 and diverges if x 2 > 1.
(iv) Omitting the first term, the n th term of the resulting series is

[Here the nth term of the A.P., 1, 5, 9, ... is 1 + (n - 1) × 4, i.e., 4n -

3 and the n th term of the A.P., 2, 6, 10, ... is 2 + (n - 1) ×  4, i.e., 4n
- 2]
and so

∴            ...(1)
So

∴ By ratio test ∑u n converges if 1/x 2 > 1, i.e., if x 2 < 1 and diverges

if 1/x2 < 1, i.e., if x 2 > 1. When 1/x 2 = 1, i.e., x 2 = 1, the ratio test
fails. We shall now apply Raabe’s test.
From (1), for x 2 = 1,

∴ 
Hence, by Raabe's test, ∑u n converges.
Thus the given series converges if x 2 ≤ 1 and diverges if x 2 > 1.

Example 2: Test the convergence of the following series

(i) 

(ii) 
Solution: (i) Omitting the first term, we have

Now

           ....(1)

∴ 
By ratio test, ∑u n converges if 1/ex > 1, i.e., if x < 1/e and diverges
if 1/ex < 1, i.e., if x > 1/e. When 1/ex = 1, i.e., x = 1/e, the test fails.
Since u n/un+1 will involve e for x = 1/ e, we shall apply logarithmic
test.
For x = 1/e, from (1)
∴ 

 n {log e - n log (1 + 1/n)}

Hence, by logarithmic test, ∑u n diverges.

Thus the given series converges if x < 1/e and diverges if x ≥ 1/e.
(ii) Here

Now,

           ...(1)
Hence

as

By ratio test, ∑u n converges if 1/ex > 1, i.e. if x < 1/e and diverges if
1/ex < 1, if x > 1/e When 1/ex = 1, i.e., x = 1/e, the test fails. We
now apply logarithmic test.
For  x = 1/e, from (1),

⇒ 

⇒ 
Hence, by logarithmic test, ∑u n diverges.
Thus the given series converges if x < 1/e and diverges if x ≥ 1/e.

Example 3: Test for converges the following series:

(i) 

(ii) 
Solution: (i) Here, we have

∴      ...(1)
Here

Hence the ratio test fails and we now apply Raabe’s test.
Using (1),
     ...(2)

∴ 
Hence the Raabe’s test fails and we now apply De-Morgan’s and
Bertrand’s test. From (2),

∴ 
and so

Hence, by De-Morgan’s and Bertrand’s test, ∑u n diverges.

(ii) Here

and

∴      ...(1)
Hence the ratio test fails and we now apply Raabe’s test. Using (1),

    ...(2)

∴ 
Hence, by Raabe’s test, ∑u n converges if b - a > 1 and diverges if b
- a < 1. When b - a = 1. Raabe’s test fails and we now apply De-
Morgan's and Bertrand’s test.

For b - a = 1, from (2), 

∴ 

∴ 
So

Hence, by De-Morgan’s and Bertrand's test, ∑u n diverges. Thus the

given series converges if b - a > 1 and diverges if b - a ≤ 1.

Example 4: Test for convergence the following series

(i) 
(ii) x + x1 + 1/2 + x1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + x1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4  + ...
Solution: (i) Omitting the first term, we have

∴     ...(1)

Here   and so ratio test fails.

We shall now apply logarithmic test, Using (1), we get

= p(1/2n - 3/8n 2 + 7/24n 3 + ....)

∴      ...(2)
So

Hence ∑un converges if p/2 > 1, i.e., if p > 2 and diverges if p/2 < 1,
i.e., if p < 2 and the test fails if p = 2.
For p = 2, from (2).

∴ 

∴ 
Hence by second logarithmic ratio test ∑u n diverges for p = 2.
Thus the given series converges if p > 1 and diverges if p ≤ 2.
(ii) Here, u n = x1 + 1/2 + ... + 1/n ,  un+1 = x1 + 1/2 + ... + 1/n + 1/(n +1)

∴     ...(1)
Here ratio test fails and we now apply logarithmic test.
From (1),

   ...(2)

∴ 
Hence ∑un converges if log (1/x) > 1, i.e., if 1/x > e, i.e., if x < 1/e
and ∑u n diverges if log (1/x) < 1, i.e., if x > 1/e. When x = 1/e, the
test fails and we shall now apply second logarithmic test
For x = 1/e, from (2)

Hence ∑un is divergent for x = 1/e.

Thus, the given series converges if x < 1/e and diverges if x ≥ 1/e

Gauss Test
Theorem: Let   an be a series with positive terms. Assuming
that there exists a real number p, a real number r > 1 and a real
bounded sequence {B n}∞n=1 such that for all n 

Then the series   converges if and only if p > 1.

Almost immediately we see that this test is somehow an improved
version of Raabe’s test. The only difference is the number r, which
in the former test was explicitly set to 2. So Gauss’ test is more
general, allowing us to decide convergence of more series. Not
surprisingly the proof is very similar.
Proof. If we start with p > 1, then for sufficiently large n we have
(for negative terms of {B n})

or (for positive terms of {B n})

Since in both cases

by using Raabe’s test we can conclude that the series   

an converges.
As for the other part of equivalence, we will assume that the
series   an converges and p = 1. By using Bertrand’s test we
get

With L’Hopital’s rule we get   (as n tends to infinity) and

therefore the series   an diverges. A contradiction.
If the series  an converges and p < 1 then (for sufficiently large
n)

and according to Raabe’s test the series  an diverges.

A contradiction. Thus p > 1.
Theorem: Let  an be a series with positive terms. Assuming
that there exist a real number p, a real number p, a real number r >
1 and a real bounded sequence {B n} such that for all n.

    ... (1)
The series an diverges if and only if p ≤ 1.
Proof: Let  an diverges if and only if p ≤ 1. Then for sufficiently
large n.

and by Raabe’s test the series   an converges. A contradiction

(hence p ≤ 1).
If p = 1 then by using Bertrand’s test (theorem)

With L’Hospital’s rule we get   (as n tends to infinity) and

therefore the series  an diverges.
If p < 1 then for sufficiently large n

We finish the proof with Raabe’s test.

An example. We want to determine the character of the

series 
With (x → ∞)

we get the final result

According to Raabe’s test, the series converges when a > 2 and

diverges when a < 2 but we get no information when a = 2. We try
Gauss’ test:
First, we try to find p

Second, we find A n

Third, we try to find r > 1 such that B n = Annr is bounded

If we set r = 2 then
And because p = 1 the series    diverges.
Therefore, according to Gauss and Raabe’s test, the

series   converges when a > 2 and diverges when a ≤

2.

Kummer’s test

Here comes probably the most powerful test for convergence, since
it applies to all series with positive terms.
Theorem: Let  an be a series with positive terms. Then the
series converges if and only if there exist a positive number A,
positive numbers p n and a number N ∈ N such that for all n > N

The series diverges if and only if there exist positive numbers

pn such that   and a number N ∈ N such that for all n > N

    ...(2)
Proof: First we prove the convergence. For the right-to-left
implication, we adjust the equation (1)
pnan - pn+1an+1 ≥ Aan+1
With qn = pn/A we can write
qnan - qn+1an+1 ≥ an+1
Since we know the left side of upper inequality, we can construct a
sequence {B n}∞n=1 such that
qnan - qn+1an+1 = Bn+1an+1,   ∀n  Bn ≥ 1
The sequence {q nan}∞n=1 is positive and decreasing (follows from
(3)).
Therefore it has a limit
0 ≤   anqn < q1a1
Thus the series

converges. And because B n ≥ 1 for all n

In words, the series   anBn converges and creates an upper

bound for the series   an, therefore the series  an must
converge as well. This is nothing more then just a first comparison
criteria. We showed that finding numbers p n is equally hard as
finding a convergent series ∑b n which creates an upper bound for
the series ∑a n in the first comparison test. For left-to-right
implication, let p 1a1 be a positive number. Now we assume the
existence of positive monotonous sequence {B n}∞n=1
 Bn = ∞           ...(4)

anBn =P1a1 + a1B1
Now we shift the index n

an+1 Bn+1 = P1a1
We define the sequence {p nan}∞n=1 this way
pn+1an+1 =pnan - an+1 Bn+1
where

pnan = p1a1 -  ak+1Bk+1 = 0

So, using (4) we have (for sufficiently large n)
pnan - pn+1an+1 = an+1Bn+1 ≥ Aan+1 where A > 0
And finally

hence the number p n are found.

Remark : In fact, the requirement (4) is not necessary as any
positive and monotonous sequence {B n} with   Bn = A ≥ 1 is
totally sufficient (where A is an arbitrary constant).
For example, let ∑a n be a convergent series. If we let B n = 1 for all
n and we construct numbers p n using the terms from ∑a n 

Kummer’s test will confirm the convergence of series ∑a n (as would

first comparison test). Now the divergence part.
Proof: For the right-to-left implication, we have ∑1/p n = ∞ and from
(2) we get

We can conclude the divergence of series  an by using the

second comparison test. To prove left-to-right implication
(when  an is divergent), we can assume, according to the
theorem, the existence of positive and monotonous sequence
Bn such that
Bn = 0      ...(5)

anBn = ∞
We have

we get

It is not difficult to see, that ∑1/p n = ∞ and pn > 0 for all n, thus we
found the numbers we were looking for.
Remark: Again, the requirement (5) is not necessary as any
positive and non-increasing {B n}  Bn = A > 0 will do the trick (as
it is the monotony we are interested in).
As in the previous remark, if ∑a n is a divergent series and if we let
Bn = 1 for all n then Kummer’s test will confirm the divergence.
Remark: To sum it up, Kummer’s test is very powerful because it
really works for all the series with positive terms. On the other
hand, using this test is equally difficult as using the first and second
comparison test. The true strength of this test therefore lies in the
numbers p n. That is, the form of this test is a masterpiece, not its
contents.
To demonstrate the power of Kummer’s test, we show that Raabe’s
test and Bertrand’s test are in fact its corollaries. As for Raabe’s
test, if we set p n = n, we get

 compare with for convergence and

compare with for divergence.

We see, that what we can decide with Raabe’s test, we can also
decide with Kummer’s test (with p n = n) and vice versa, thus they
are equivalent.
As for Kummer’s version of Bertrand’s test, we set p n = n In n and
put it into the left side of (1):

so
     .. (6)
Where

We go back to (1). With (6), if

∃A > 0, ∃N ∈ N, ∀n > N :

     ...(7)
then the series  an is convergent.
Compare with Bertrand’s test:
If ∃A > 0, ∃N ∈ N,  ∀n > N:

     ...(8)
then the series  an is convergent.
Since ε(n) can get arbitrarily small as n tends to infinity, we can
hide it inside the positive constant A. Thus (7) and (8) are
equivalent.
Divergence is a bit different and we will see that in this case, the
tests are not equivalent. That is, Kummer’s test is slightly stronger.
It is because now we have zero as a sharp border, while the
constant A from the previous case was quite flexible.
With (2), (6) and p n = n In n : if

then the series   is divergent. Compare with Bertrand’s test

(see (5)) : If
then the series   an is divergent.
Now let's consider the series  an, where an = 1/nInn. Using
Bertrand’s test

(n + 1) In (n + 1) - n In n - In n - 1 = (n + 1) In (1 + 1/n) - 1 = ε(n) ≤
0 → false Using Kummer’s test (with p n = n In n)

0 ≤ 0 → true
There is infinite number of series that can be decided only with
Kummer’s version of Bertrand’s test, but if we use limit, the tests
are equivalent.

Root Test

Test IX. Cauchy’s nth Root Test

Let ∑u n be a positive terms series such that
 (un)1/n = I.     ...(1)
Then (i) ∑un converges if / < 1, (ii) ∑u n diverges if / > 1. Test fails
if / = 1.
Proof : Case I. Let / < 1.
We can choose some ε > 0 such that / + ε < 1 or α < 1, α = / + ε.
Using (1), there exists a positive integer m 1 such that
I (un)1/n - I | < ε     ∀  n ≥ m1.
or / - ε < (un)1/n < / + ε        ∀ n ≥ m1.
Consider (u n)1/n  < / + ε = α      ∀ n ≥ m1.
un < αn    ∀ n ≥ m1.            ...(2)
Since ∑αn = α + α2 + .. being a geometric series with common ratio
α < 1 is convergent, so by First Comparison Test as applied in
(2), ∑un is convergent.
Case II. Let / > 1.
We can choose another ε > 0 such that / — ε > 1 or β > 1, β = / - ε.
Using (1), there exists a positive integer m 2 such that
I (un)1/n - / I < ε    ∀ n ≥ m2.
or / - ε < (un)1/n < / + ε  ∀ n ≥ m2.
Consider l - ε < (u n)1/n   ∀ n ≥ m2.
or βn < un         ∀ n ≥ m2.        ...(3)
Since ∑βn being a geometric series with common ratio β > 1 is
divergent, so by First Comparison Test as applied in (3), ∑u n is
divergent.
Case III. We shall give examples of two series : one convergent
and the other divergent, but both satisfying   (un)1/n = 1.
The series ∑u n = ∑1/n is divergent, but

The series ∑un = ∑1/n2 is convergent, but

Cauchy’s Condensation Test
Statement: For a non-increasing sequence {a n} of non-negative
real numbers, the series ∑a n converges if and only if the
series   converges.
Proof: Observe that since {a n} is decreasing:
a1 + (a2 + a3) + (a4 + a5 + a6 + a7) +...+ aN ≤ a1 + 2a2 + 4a4 + ...
+ 
⇒ 

 = a2 + (a2 + a3) + (a3 + 2a4 + a5) + (a5 + 2a6 + 2a7 + 2a8 + a9)
+... + 2aN ≥ a2 + 2a4 + 4a8 + 8a16 + .....+ 

Thus proved.

Example 1: Discuss convergence of 

 is monotone decreasing as log n is increasing.

Thus, the series converges iff p > 1.

Statements of two important tests for series with arbitrary terms :

Abel's test : If {(xn)} is a convergent monotone sequence and the
series ∑yn is convergent, then the series ∑x nyn is also convergent.
Dirichlet's test: If {(xn)} is a decreasing sequence with lim x n = 0,
and if the partial sums {(s n)} of ∑yn are bounded, then the
series ∑xnyn is convergent.

Alternating Series
A series of the form u 1 - u2 + u3 - u4 + ..., where u n > 0 ∀ n ∈ N is
called an alternating series and is denoted by

We have   = u1 - u2 + u3 - u4 + ... + (-1) n-1 un + ...

Example:

Leibnitz Test

If an alternating series   satisfies

(i) Each term is numerically less than the proceeding term i.e.
un ≤ un-1 ∀ n,
(ii) 
then the series ∑(-1) n-1 un converges.
Proof : In order to prove that the given series converges, we shall
show that its sequence 〈Sn〉 of partial sums converges. For this we
shall first prove that the subsequences 〈Sn〉 and 〈S2n + 1〉 both
converge to the same limit.
Now = S2n = u1 - u2 + u3 - u4 + .... + u2n - 1 -  u2n,
and S2n+2 = u1 - u2 + u3 - u4 +  .... + u 2n-1 - u2n + u2n+1 - u2n +2.
∴ S2n+2 - S2n + u2n + 1 - u2n + 2 ≥ 0.     (∵ Un+1 ≤ un < ∀ n )
Thus 〈S2n〉 is a monotonically increasing sequence.
Again S2n = u1 - u2 + u3 - u4 + u5 - u6 + ... + u2n-1, - u2n 
= u1 - [(u2 - u3) + (u4 - u5) + ... + (U 2n-2 - u2n-2) + u2n]
Now each term within the bracket is positive, since
un+1 ≤ un ∀ n and u 2n > 0.
∴ S2n < u1 ∀ n and so 〈S2n〉 is bounded above.
Since 〈S2n〉 is monotonically increasing and bounded above,
therefore 〈S2n〉 is convergent.

  ....(iii)
We shall now show that 〈S2n + 1〉 converges to l. We have
 S2n + 1 = u1 - u2 + u3 - u4 + .... + u2n - 1 , - u2n + u2n + 1
From (iii), (iv), it follows that for any ε > 0, there exists positive
integers m1 and m2 such that
    ...(v)
   ....(vi)
Let m = max (m 1, m2) so that m ≥ m 1, m ≥ m2,     .....(vii)
From (v), (vi), (vii) ;

⇒ 〈Sn〉 converges to l.

Remark: The alternating series ∑(-1) n-1 un will not be convergent if

either   

For Example 

Example:

This is an alternating series

So we can check the convergence by applying leibnitz test
and so on
i.e. Each term of a n is decreasing

So by Leibnitz test the given series converges. 

Example 1: Test for convergence the series

We have

(i) un+1 < un ∀ n,

(ii) 
Hence, by Leibnitz’s Test, the given series is convergent.
(b) The proof of similar. The given series is convergent.

Example 2: Using the Alternating Series Test

Determine the convergence or divergence of 

Note that   So, the first condition of Theorem is

satisfied. Also note that the second condition of Theorem satisfied
because

for all n. So, applying the Alternating Series Test, you can conclude
the series converges. 

Example 3: Using the Alternating Series Test

Determine the convergence or divergence of 

To apply the Alternating Series Test, note that, for n ≥ 1,

So, an+1 = (n + 1)/2n ≤ n/2n - 1 = an for all n. Furthermore, by

L’Hopital's Rule,

Therefore, by the Alternating Series Test, the series converges.

Example: When the Alternating Series Test Does Not Apply

a. The alternating series

passes the second condition of the Alternating Series Test because

an + 1 ≤ an for all n. You cannot apply the Alternating. Series Test,
however, because the series does not pass the first condition. In
fact, the series diverges.
b. The alternating series

passes the first condition because a n approaches 0 as n → ∞. You

cannot apply the Alternating Series Test, however, because the
series does not pass the second condition. To conclude that the
series diverges, you can argue that S 2N equals the N th partial sum
of the divergent harmonic series. This implies that the sequence of
partial sums diverges. So, the series diverges.

Example: The alternating harmonic series

satisfies

(i) bn+1 < bn because 

So the series is convergent by the Alternating Series Test.

Absolute and Conditional Convergence

Sometimes series have both positive and negative terms but they
are not perfectly alternating like those in the previous section. For
example

is not alternating but does have both positive and negative terms.
So how do we deal with such series? The answer is to take the
absolute value of the terms. This turns the sequence into a non-
negative series and now we can apply many of our previous
convergence tests. For example if we take the absolute value of
the terms in the series above, we get

Since Isin nl ≤ 1, then

But   converges by the p-series test (p = 2 > 1), so   

converges by comparison.

But what about the original series   The next theorem

provides the answer: The series does converge.

Theorem: (The Absolute Convergence Test). If   converges so

does 
Proof. Given   converges. Define a new series   where

So 0 ≤ bn = an + lanl < lanl + lanl = 2la nl. But  converges, hence

by direct comparison   converges. Therefore

converges since it is the difference of two convergent series.

Important Note: The converse is not true. If   converges,  

may or may not converge.

For example, the alternating harmonic series   converges,

but if we take the absolute value of the terms, the harmonic

series 
This leads to the following definition.

Absolute Convergence 
A series ∑un is said to be absolutely convergent if the series ∑ I
un I is convergent.

Example: The series   is absolutely convergent,

since   being a geometric series with common

ratio r = 1/2 < 1, is convergent.
Example 1: Determine whether   converges absolutely,
conditionally, or not at all.

Notice that this series is not positive nor is it alternating since the
first few terms are approximately

First we check absolute convergence.   looks a lot like the

p-series   with P = 2 > 1. We can use the direct comparison

test. Since 0 ≤ Icos nl ≤ 1,  for all n. Since the p-

series   converges, so does   by the direct comparison

test (Theorem). So the series of absolute values converges. The
original series is absolutely convergent. We need to check further.

Conditional Convergence 
A series ∑un is said to be conditionally convergent, if
(i) ∑un is convergent and
(ii) ∑un is not absolutely convergent.

Example: The series   is conditionally

convergent, since the given series is convergent (by Leibnitz Test)

and   is not convergent, i.e., ∑u n is not

absolutely convergent.

Example 1: Determine whether   converges absolutely,

conditionally, or not at all.
First we check absolute convergence.

Notice that   So let’s use the limit comparison test. The
terms of the series are positive and

Since the harmonic series   diverges (p-series with p = 1),

then   diverges by the limit comparison test. So the series

does not converge absolutely.
Since the series is alternating and not absolutely convergent, we
check for conditional convergence using the alternating series test

with   Check the two conditions.

1.
2. Further an+1 ≤ an is decreasing because

 (You could also show the derivative

is negative.) Since the two conditions of the alternating

series test are satisfied,   is conditionally

convergent by the alternating series test.

Example: Determine whether    is aK  p-series with

 
So the series of absolute values diverges. The original series is not
absolutely convergent.
Since the series is alternating and not absolutely convergent, we
check for conditional convergence using the alternating series test

with   Check the two conditions.

1.

2.

Since the two conditions of the alternating series test are

satisfied,   is conditionally convergent by the alternating

series test..

Theorem: Every absolutely convergent series is convergent. The

converse need not be true.
Proof: Let ∑un be an absolutely convergent series.
Then ∑ I un I is convergent.
By cauchy’s General Principle of Convergence, for any ε > 0, there
exists a positive integer m s.t.
I I um + 1 I + I um + 2 I + ... + I un I I < ε, ∀ n ≥ m
⇒ I um + 1 I + I u m + 2 I + ... + I u n I < ε, ∀ n ≥ m.
Now I u m + 1 + um + 2 + ... + u n I ≤ I u m + 1 I + I u m + 2 I + ... + I u n I < ε ∀ n
≥ m.
Hence ∑ u n is convergent (by Cauchy’s Principle of Convergence).
(ii) The converse of the theorem is not true i.e.,
A convergent series may not be absolutely convergent.
Consider the series

We have seen that the given series is convergent, by Leibnitz’s

Test but   s not convergent i.e. ∑ u n is

not absolutely convergent.
Example 1: Determine whether   converges
absolutely, conditionally, or not at all.

First we check absolute convergence.

Notice that   So let’s use the limit comparison test. The
terms of the series are postive and

Since   converges (p-series with p = 5 > 1), then   

converges by the limit comparison test. So the series converges
absolutely.

Example 2: Determine whether   converges absolutely,

conditionally, or not at all. 

First we check absolute convergence.   We use the

direct comparison test with   Notice that   

because n > 1. Next   (To check that   

diverges, use the integral test and u = substitution with u = In

x.   In lln bl - ln(ln 2) = +∞.

Consequently   diverges by the direct comparison test. So the

series does not converges absolutely.
Since the series is alternating and not absolutely convergent, we
check for conditional convergence using the alternating series test

with   Check the two conditions.

1.
2. Further a n is decreasing since

Since the two conditions of the alternating series test are satisfied,

 is conditionally convergent by the alternating series test.

Example 3: Determine whether   converges absolutely,

conditionally, or not at all.

First we check absolute convergence.   Use the nth

term test:

Since lim n→∞ an ≠ 0 the series automatically diverges and cannot

converge absolutely or conditionally.
When we test for absolute convergence using the ratio test, we can
say more. If the ratio r is actually greater than 1, the series will
diverge. We don’t even need to check conditional convergence.

Theorem (The Ratio Test Extension): 

Assume that   is a series with non-zero terms and

let 
 1. If r < 1, then the series   converges absolutely.

2. If r > 1 (including ∞) , then the series   diverges.

3. If r = 1, then the test is inconclusive. The series may converge
or diverge.
This is most helpful when the series diverges. It says we can
check for absolute convergence and if we find the absolute
value series diverges, then the original series diverges. We
don’t have to check for conditional convergence.

Example 1: Determine whether   conver ges absolutely,

conditionally, or not at all.

Here’s a perfect place to use the ratio test because there is a

factorial.

The (original) series diverges by the ratio test. The ratio test says
we don’t have to check for conditional convergence.

Example 2: Determine whether   converges

absolutely, conditionally, or not at all.

First we check absolute convergence using the ratio test because

of the factorial.

The (original) series diverges by the ratio test extension.

Example 3: Determine whether   converges absolutely,

conditionally, or not at all.
Check absolute convergence using the ratio test extension.

The (original) series converges absolutely by the ratio test

extension.

Example 4: Does the following series converge absolutely,

converge conditionally, or diverge?

Let us look at the positive term series for this given series.

This is a geometric series with ratio, r = 4/5, which is less than 1.

Therefore this series converges, and the given series converges
absolutely.

Example 5: Does the following series converge absolutely,

converge conditionally, or diverge?

Let us look at the positive term series for the given series.

This is the harmonic series and it diverges, so the given series will
not converge absolutely. Now we must determine if the given
series will converge conditionally or diverge. To do this, we will
have to look at the alternating series. To do this, we must use the
alternating series test.
Let un = 1/n.
un > 0 for all n ≥ 1, so the first condition of this test is satisfied.
Now we must determine if the second condition is satisfied. This is
easy to see. As n gets larger, the fraction 1/n gets smaller. So u n ≥
un+1 and the second condition is true. Now let us determine if the
third condition is satisfied.
The third condition holds, so the alternating series converges, and
the given series converges conditionally.
So here the steps you will need to follow when determining
absolute convergence, conditional convergence or divergence of a
series. Look at the positive term series first. If the positive term
A. If it converges, then the given series converges absolutely.
B. If the positive terms series diverges, use the alternating series
test to determine if the alternating series converges. If this
alternating series diverges, then the given series diverges.

Example 6: Does the following series converge absolutely,

converges conditionally, or diverges?

Here is the positive term series.

we are going to use the ratio test to determine the convergence of

this series.

So the positive term series diverges by the ratio test, and the given
series does not converge absolutely. Therefore, we will have to
look at the alternating series to determine if it converges or not.

un is positive for n ≥ 1, so the first condition is satisfied. Now to

determine it the second condition is holds. To help me determine
this, we will plot the first 5 term of this sequence.
 Therefore, the third
condition is not satisfied because the terms of this sequence are
increasing. In fact 4 n grows faster than n 2. So the alternating series
diverges, and the given series also diverges. 

Example 7: Does the following series converge absolutely,

converge conditionally, or diverge?

Since the cos nπ is the alternating term, the positive term series is
the harmonic series. Remember that the harmonic series diverges,
so the given series does not converge absolutely. Now to
determine the convergence of the alternating series.
Let un = 1/n.
un > 0 for all n ≥ 1, so the first condition of this test satisfied.
Now we must determine if the second condition is satisfied. This is
easy to see. As n gets larger, the fraction 1/n gets smaller. So u n ≥
un + 1 and the second condition is true. Now let us determine if the
third condition is satisfied.

The third condition holds, so the alternating series converges, and

the given series converges conditionally.
Example 8: Does the following series converge absolutely,
converge conditionally, or diverge?

Here is the positive term series.

Since nth term is raised to the nth power, we will use the nth-root
test to determine convergence or divergence of this series.

The positive term series converges by the nth-root test. Therefore,

the given series converges absolutely.

Convergence of the Infinite Integral

Definition: The infinite integral  is said to be convergent

(divergent), if   is finite (infinite).

We state a result without proof:

Theorem: If f(x) ≥ 0 ∀ x ≥ 1, then   is convergent iff there

exists a positive number k such that for 

Example 1: Examine the convergence and divergence of

(i) 

(ii) 

 (i) We have

Definition: Let f(x) be a real valued function with domain [1, ∞[.

The function f(x) is said to be non-negative, if f(x) ≥ 0 ∀ x ≥ 1.
The function f(x) is said to be monotonically decreasing, if x ≤ y ⇒
f(x) ≥ f(y) ; x, y ∈ [1, ∞[.
For example, f(x) = 1/x 2 is non-negative and monotonically
decreasing ∀ x ≥ 1.

Cauchy’s Integral Test 

If u(x) is a non-negative, monotonically decreasing and integrable

function such that u(n) = u n ∀ n ∈ N, then the series   is

convergent if and only if   is convergent.

Proof : Since u(x) is monotonically decreasing, so
u(n) ≥ u(x) ≥ u(n + 1), when n ≤ x ≤ n + 1.
Since u(x) is non-negative and integrable, so
    ....(1)
Putting n = 1, 2, n - 1 in (1) and adding, we get

  where Sn = u1 + u2 + ... + un-1 + un 

    ....(2)
The condition is necessary.

Suppose the series   is convergent.

Then there exists a positive number K such that
Sn ≤ K ∀ n.   ......(3)

The condition is sufficient.

Then there exists a positive number k such that

   ....(4)

From (2) and (4),

or Sn ≤ k + u 1 ∀ n, so that 〈Sn〉 is bounded above.
Hence the series ∑ u n is convergent.

Example 1: Show that the series   is convergent if p >

1 and divergent if p ≤ 1.

Let un = 1/np and u(x) = 1/x p , so that u(n) = u n ∀ n ∈ N.

Clearly, for x ≥ 1, u(x) is non-negative, integrable and a decreasing
function of x. Now 

= (log t - log 1), if p = 1.

    (∵ log 1 = 0)

If Follows that the improper integral  is convergent if p > 1 and

divergent if p ≤ 1. Hence, by Cauchy’s integral test,   is

convergent if p > 1 and divergent if p ≤ 1.
Example 2: Show that the series   is convergent if p >
1 and divergent if 0 < p ≤ 1.

Then for x ≥ 2, u(x) is non-negative, monotonically decreasing and

integrable function. Also u(n) = u n ∀ n ∈ N.

Thus   is convergent if p > 1 and divergent if 0 < p ≤ 1.

Hence, by Cauchy’s Integral Test, the given series is convergent if
p > 1 and divergent if 0 < p ≤ 1.

Example 3: Test for convergence the series

consider the case p = 1.

Hence the given series diverges.

Example 4: Apply Cauchy’s Integral Test to examine the
convergence of the following series:
(i) 

(ii)

(i)

 so that u(n) = u n ∀ n ∈ N.

For x ≥ 1, u(x) is non-negative, monotonically decreasing and
integrable function. Now

Thus   is convergent and so  is convergent.

(By Cauchy’s Integral Test)

(ii)   so that u(n) = u n ∀ n ∈ N.

For x ≥ 1, u(x) is non-negative, monotonically decreasing and
integrable function. Now
Thus   dx is a convergent and so by Cauchy’s Integral Test, the
given series is convergent.

Example 5: Test the convergent of

For x ≥ 3, u(x) is non-negative , monotonically decreasing and

integrable function. Now

where y = log log x,

y1 = log log 3, y 2 = log log t

Thus   is convergent if p > 1 and divergent if 0 < p ≤ 1.

Hence, by Cauchy’s Integral Test, the given series is convergent if
p > 1 and divergent if 0 < p ≤ 1.