131A: Homework # 3 - Sample Solutions

Section 2.11 (p. 73 - 74)

Exercise 11.2 [4 pts]

Question an bn cn dn

Indices nk = 2k nk = k nk = k nk = k
(a)
1 1 10 16 22
Subsequence 1 = 1 = 1 = ... 1≥ 2 ≥ 3 ≥ ... 1 ≤ 4 ≤ 9 ≤ ... 4 ≥ 11 ≥ 18 ≥ ...

(b) Subsequential Limits {−1, 1} {0} {+∞} { 67 }

6
Limsup 1 0 +∞ 7
(c)
6
Liminf −1 0 +∞ 7

(d) Convergent? No Yes Divergent Yes

(e) Bounded? Yes Yes No Yes

Exercise 11.3 [4 pts]

Question sn tn un vn

Indices nk = 6k nk = k nk = 2k nk = 2k
(a)
3 3 3 1 1 1 3 5 7
Subsequence 1 = 1 = 1 = ... 5 ≥ 9 ≥ 13 ≥ ... 4 ≥ 16 ≥ 64 ≥ ... 2 ≥ 4 ≥ 6 ≥ ...

(b) Subsequential Limits {−1, − 12 , 12 , 1} {0} {0} {−1, 1}

Limsup 1 0 0 1
(c)
Liminf −1 0 0 −1

(d) Convergent? No Yes Yes No

(e) Bounded? Yes Yes Yes Yes

1
Exercise 11.4 [4 pts]

Question wn xn yn zn

Indices nk = 2k nk = 2k nk = 2k nk = 8k
(a)
Subsequence 4 ≤ 16 ≤ 64 ≤ . . . 5 = 5 = 5 = ... 2 = 2 = 2 = ... 8 ≤ 16 ≤ 24 ≤ . . .

(b) Subsequential Limits {−∞, +∞} { 51 , 5} {0, 2} {−∞, 0, +∞}

Limsup +∞ 5 2 +∞
(c)
1
Liminf −∞ 5 0 −∞

(d) Convergent? No No No No

(e) Bounded? No Yes Yes No

Exercise 11.5 [2 pts]

(a) We claim the set of subsequential limits is [0, 1]. In Example 3, it was shown that every real number is
a limit of rationals. Given x ∈ (0, 1), and choosing  = min{x, 1 − x}, we see that eventually any sequence
of rationals converging to x must be in the interval (0, 1). By choosing an appropriate subsequence (see
Example 3 for details), we can choose a subsequence of (qn ) that converges to x.
Since n1 → 0, we can choose a common subsequence of this sequence and qn that converges to 0. As
1 − n1 → 1, we similarly have a subsequence converging to 1. Thus 0 and 1 are subsequential limits as well.
If x < 0 or x > 1, and qnk → x, then for k sufficiently large [with  = min{|x|, |x − 1|}], we must have
qnk < 0 or qnk > 1, which is impossible. Hence the set of subsequential limits is precisely [0, 1]

(b) As the lim sup is the supremum of the subsequential limits, lim sup qn = 1. Similarly, lim inf qn = 0.

Exercise 11.8 [2 pts]

(a)

lim inf sn = limN →∞ inf{sn : n > N } by definition

= limN →∞ − sup (−{sn : n > N }) by Exercise 5. 4

= − limN →∞ sup{−sn : n > N } by limit rules

= − lim sup(−sn ) by definition

(b) Suppose (tk ) is a monotonic subsequence of (−sn ) converging to lim sup(−sn ). Then for all k we have
an nk such that tk = −snk . Thus −tk = snk , and so (−tk ) is a subsequence of (sn ). Moreover,

lim(−tk ) = − lim tk = − lim sup(−sn ) = lim inf sn

where we use a limit rule and part (a) for the first and third equalities. Finally, if (tk ) is non-decreasing,
then t1 ≤ t2 ≤ . . ., so −t1 ≥ −t2 ≥ . . ., and (−tk ) is non-increasing. Similarly, if (tk ) is non-increasing, then
(−tk ) is non-decreasing. Thus we have constructed a monotone subsequence of (sn ) converging to lim inf sn ,
completing the proof of Corollary 11.4.

2
Section 2.12 (p. 78)
Exercise 12.1 [3 pts]
If lim inf sn = −∞, then we have to show −∞ ≤ lim inf tn , which is immediate. If lim inf tn = +∞, we have
to show lim inf sn ≤ +∞, which is also immediate. Hence we assume −∞ < lim inf sn and lim inf tn < +∞.

By Corollary 11.4, we have a subsequence (tnk ) that converges to lim inf tn . Consider (snk ) as a sequence
in its own right. By Corollary 11.4, there is a monotone subsequence (snkj ) that converges to lim inf k snk .
Since (snkj ) is a subsequence of (snk ), it is a subsequence of (sn ), and hence lim inf sn ≤ lim snkj (the
lim inf is the infimum of the subsequential limits). But for all j, snkj ≤ tnkj , and so tnkj − snkj ≥ 0. Thus
limj→∞ tnkj − snkj ≥ 0. Using the limit rules, and the fact that lim tnkj = lim tnk = lim inf tn , we get

lim inf sn ≤ lim snkj ≤ lim tnkj = lim inf tn

as required.

Now since sn ≤ tn for all n, we have −tn ≤ −sn for all n. Thus by our above argument, lim inf(−tn ) ≤
lim inf(−sn ), and hence − lim inf(−sn ) ≤ − lim inf(−tn ). Using Exercise 11.8, lim sup sn ≤ lim sup tn .

Exercise 12.2 [2 pts]

If lim sn = 0, then for all k, there is an Nk such that if n > Nk , |sn − 0| = |sn | < k1 . Hence sup{|sn | : n >
N } ≤ sup{|sn | : n > Nk } < k1 for all N ≥ Nk . Thus lim sup sn = limN →∞ sup{|sn | : n > N } ≤ k1 . As this
holds for all k, it follows that lim sup |sn | ≤ 0. Since |sn | ≥ 0 for all n, it follows that lim sup |sn | ≥ 0. Thus
lim sup |sn | = 0.

Conversely, if lim sup |sn | = 0, then for all  > 0 there is an N0 such that for N > N0 , sup{|sn | : n >
N } ≤ . Hence for all n > N0 + 1, |sn | = |sn − 0| < . This shows that lim sn = 0.

Exercise 12.4 [2 pts]

For any N and all n > N , we have sn ≤ sup{sk : k > N } and tn ≤ sup{tk : k > N }. Hence sn + tn ≤
sup{sk : k > N } + sup{tk : k > N }. This shows that sup{sk : k > N } + sup{tk : k > N } is an upper bound
of the set {sn + tn : n > N }, and hence sup{sn + tn : n > N } ≤ sup{sk : k > N } + sup{tk : k > N }. As this
holds for all N ,

lim sup{sn +tn : n > N } ≤ lim (sup{sk : k > N } + sup{tk : k > N }) = lim {sk : k > N }+ lim {tk : k > N }
N →∞ N →∞ N →∞ N →∞

(since the sequences are bounded, the lim infs are finite, and we may take the sum outside the limit)
By definition, this shows lim sup(sn + tn ) ≤ lim sup sn + lim sup tn .

Exercise 12.5 [2 pts]

By Exercise 12.4, lim sup(−(sn + tn )) ≤ lim sup(−sn ) + lim sup(−tn ). Hence − lim sup(−(sn + tn )) ≥
− lim sup(−sn ) − lim sup(−tn ). By Exercise 11.8, this shows lim inf(sn + tn ) ≥ lim inf sn + lim inf tn .

Exercise 12.6 [3 pts]

(a) Define a sequence (kn ) with kn = k for all n. Then we have lim kn = k > 0, so by Theorem 12.1,

lim sup(ksn ) = lim sup(kn sn ) = (lim kn ) lim sup sn = k lim sup sn

3
(b)
lim inf(ksn ) = − lim sup(−ksn ) = −k lim sup(−sn ) = k lim inf sn
where we use Exercise 11.8 twice, and part (a) in between.

(c) If k < 0, then note that k = −|k|, with |k| > 0. Thus, using Exercise 11.8 and parts (a) and (b), we have

lim sup(ksn ) = lim sup(−|k|sn ) = |k| lim sup(−sn ) = −|k| lim inf sn = k lim inf sn

and
lim inf(ksn ) = lim inf(−|k|sn ) = |k| lim inf(−sn ) = −|k| lim sup sn = k lim sup sn

Exercise 12.7 [2 pts]

If lim sup sn = +∞, then there is a subsequence (snj ) such that limj→∞ snj = +∞. Thus for all M > 0,
since M M
k > 0, there is a J such that for j > J, we have snj > k . Thus for j > J, ksnj > M . This shows that
limj→∞ ksnj = +∞, and hence +∞ is a subsequential limit of (ksn ). Since the lim sup is the supremum of
all subsequential limits, lim sup(ksn ) = +∞.