MAT 319 - Spring 2016 Homework 3 Solutions

TA: El Mehdi Ainasse - R01

Section 8
n
8.2 (a) lim = 0.
n2 + 1
1
Proof: We know that lim 1/n = 0. Thus: ∀ε > 0, ∃N ∈ N, ∀n > N : < ε.
n
n n 1
But since < 2 = , ∀n ∈ N, it follows that:
n2 +1 n n
n n 1
∀ε > 0, ∃N ∈ N, ∀n > N : = 2 −0 ≤ <ε
n2 + 1 n +1 n
Therefore, the limit is indeed 0 by definition.
7n − 19
(b) lim = 7/3.
3n + 7
7n − 19 7 −106
Proof: Given ε > 0, then − < ε if and only if < ε.
3n + 7 3 3(3n + 7)
−106 106
Obviously, 3n + 7 > 0, whence = . The rest of the proof
3(3n + 7) 3(3n + 7)
is quasi-identical to that of the Discussion of Example 2 in page 40 of the
textbook: “solve” for n, and then, knowing that the steps are reversible, restate
your proof adequately.
4n + 3
(c) lim = 4/7.
7n − 5
4n + 3 4 41
Proof: Given ε > 0, then − < ε if and only if < ε. The
7n − 5 7 7(7n − 5)
rest of the proof is quasi-identical to that of the Discussion of Example 2 in
page 40 of the textbook (cf. remark above).
2n + 4
(d) lim = 2/5.
5n + 2
Proof: Same process as in (b) and (c).

sin(n)
(e) lim = 0.
n
1
We know that lim 1/n = 0. Therefore: ∀ε > 0, ∃N ∈ N, ∀n > N : < ε. But
n
since | sin(n)| ≤ 1, ∀n ∈ N, it follows that:
sin(n) sin(n) 1
∀ε > 0, ∃N ∈ N, ∀n > N : = −0 ≤ <ε
n n n

1
Therefore, the limit is indeed 0 by definition.
(Note that (a) and (e) are handled similarly using estimates: that is, we com-
pare the given sequence to an already known sequence, and we conclude by
comparison. This will also be used in the last problem.)

8.4 Let (tn ) be a bounded sequence and (sn ) be such that lim sn = 0. As
we need to show that lim(sn tn ) = 0, we formally need to prove that given
ε > 0, there exists an N ∈ N such that |sn tn | < ε for all n > N . Now as (tn ) is
bounded, ∃M > 0 : |tn | ≤ M, ∀n ∈ N. Also, since lim sn = 0, then by definition:
ε
∀ε > 0, ∃N ∈ N, ∀n > N : |sn | < . (Note that the usual ε in the definition
M
can be indeed chosen to be ε/M since ε is arbitrarily small.) Then, we can see
that given ε sufficiently small and n large enough, |sn tn | < ε as follows:
ε
∀ε > 0, ∃N ∈ N, ∀n > N : |sn tn | = |sn ||tn | ≤ |sn |M < M =ε
M
Therefore, lim(sn tn ) = 0 by definition.

8.6 (a)
lim sn = 0
if and only if
∀ε > 0, ∃N ∈ N, ∀n > N : |sn − 0| < ε
if and only if
∀ε > 0, ∃N ∈ N, ∀n > N : |sn | < ε
if and only if
∀ε > 0, ∃N ∈ N, ∀n > N : ||sn || < ε
if and only if
∀ε > 0, ∃N ∈ N, ∀n > N : ||sn | − 0| < ε
if and only if
lim |sn | = 0

(b) It has already been shown in the textbook that for sn = (−1)n , (sn ) does
not converge and so lim sn does not exist. However, note that |sn | = |(−1)n | = 1
and so lim |sn | exists and is equal to 1 as (|sn |) is just the constant sequence of
value 1 identically.

Section 9

9.2 Suppose lim xn = 3 and lim yn = 7. Then, by the properties of limits:

lim(xn + yn ) = lim xn + lim yn = 3 + 7 = 10

(Note that this does not require the assumption that yn 6= 0, ∀n ∈ N.)
Also, since all the yn are nonzero, then:
   
3yn − xn yn xn 1 lim xn 3 lim xn
lim = lim 3 2 − 2 = 3 lim − = − ,
yn2 yn yn yn lim yn2 lim yn (lim yn )2

2
  
3yn − xn 3 3 18
and so lim = − 2 = .
yn2 7 7 49
(Note that this time the assumption that yn 6= 0, ∀n ∈ N is absolutely necessary
for otherwise the expression inside the limit would not be defined.)
√
9.4 Let s1 = 1 and sn+1 = sn + 1 for n ≥ 1.
√ √ p√ √
qp
(a) s1 = 1, s2 = 1 + 1 = 2, s3 = 2 + 1 and s4 = 2 + 1 + 1.
(b) Assuming sn converges, denote its limit by `. Then lim sn+1 = lim sn = `
as if n is large enough, so is n + 1 or one would simply put m = n + 1 √ and note
that m → ∞ if and only if n → ∞. Now given this, then since sn+1 = sn + 1,
it follows that s2n+1 = sn + 1 and so, by taking the limit, `2 = ` + 1. This
equation can easily
√ be solved using
√ the quadratic formula and we can see that
1+ 5 1− 5
either ` = or ` = . However, we can actually prove that ` ≥ 1.
2 2
Indeed, √ s1 = 1 ≥ 1,√and assuming that sn ≥ 1 for a fixed n ≥ 1, we obtain that
sn+1 = sn + 1 ≥ 1 + 1 > 1, and thus sn ≥ 1 for all n ∈ N, by induction. By
taking the limit, ` ≥ 1 since the inequality must also hold for n √ large enough.
1+ 5
Therefore, the second solution is dismissed and lim sn = ` = .
2
9.6 Let x1 = 1 and xn+1 = 3x2n for n ≥ 1.
(a) Let a = lim xn . By the same reasoning as in 9.4 (b), then taking the limit in
the recurrence relation yields a = 3a2 so that 3a2 −a = 0 and thus a(3a−1) = 0.
1
Therefore, a = 0 or 3a = 1; i.e., a = 0 or a = .
3
(b) Notice that x2 = 3 and given the recurrence relation, once would expect xn
to be at least 3 for any n > 1 (since x1 = 1). The base case is verified, and for
a fixed n ≥ 2, if we assume that xn ≥ 3, then xn+1 = 3x2n ≥ 3 × 32 > 3 which
shows (by induction) that xn ≥ 3 for any n > 1. But then, for n large enough,
this should also be true, and thus a ≥ 3 which contradicts the result achieved
in (a). Therefore, a doesn’t exist.
(c) The explanation here is that the sequence (xn ) does in fact diverge to +∞, in
which case the assumption that the limit exists (and is thus finite) in part (a) is
invalid, and confirmed by the reasoning established in part (b). Note that since
xn ≥ 1 for all n ≥ 1 from the above, then x2n ≥ xn for all n ≥ 1 and so xn+1 ≥
3xn for all n ≥ 1. But then, it can (easily) be seen (and proven inductively)
that xn ≥ 3n−1 x1 = 3n−1 for any n ≥ 1. The base case is trivially verified, and
for a fixed n ≥ 1, it follows that xn+1 = 3x2n ≥ 3 × (3n−1 )2 = 32n−1 ≥ 3n , which
proves the claim. Clearly, lim 3n−1 = +∞ as 3 > 1. Therefore, by definition,
for any M > 0, there exists an N ∈ N such that for any n > N , 3n−1 > M .
Then:
∀M > 0, ∃N ∈ N, ∀n > N : xn > M,
since xn ≥ 3n−1 , ∀n ≥ 1, and thus lim xn = +∞ by definition.