Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I want to prove the following:

Let $\{ a_n \}$ and $\{ b_n \}$ be two sequences with $a_n>0$ and $b_n>0$ for all $n \geq N$, and let $$c_n = b_n - \frac{a_{n+1}b_{n+1}}{a_n}$$

Then

  1. If there exists $r>0$ such that $0<r\leq c_n \text{ ; } \forall n\geq N$ then $\displaystyle\sum a_n$ converges.
  2. If $c_n\leq0$ for $n\geq N$ and if $\displaystyle\sum \dfrac{1}{b_n}$ diverges, then so does $\displaystyle\sum a_n$.

So far I know how to use and prove Cauchy's, D'Alambert's and the integral criterion, so I'd like a hint on either using those or a new idea. The book suggests that for $1$, I show that

$$\sum\limits_{k = N}^n {{a_k} \leq \frac{{{a_N}{b_N}}}{r}} $$

and for $2$, to prove that $\displaystyle\sum a_n$ dominates $\displaystyle\sum \dfrac{1}{b_n}$

I'd like to prove this with previous theory on series convergence (Cauchy's and/or D'Alambert's preferrably, comparison test) since it is what precedes the problem, and would appreaciate great HINTS rather than answers.

I can't seem to understand the inequalities. I mean, Cauchy's and D'Alambert's criteria reveal that the proof relies on the fact that a geometric series of with ratio $|r| < 1$ converges, but I can't understand the motivation in this proof.


Summing up the work.

For 1:

$$\eqalign{ & {b_N} = {c_N} + \frac{{{a_{N + 1}}}}{{{a_N}}}{b_{N + 1}} \cr & {b_N} = {c_N} + \frac{{{a_{N + 1}}}}{{{a_N}}}{c_{N + 1}} + \frac{{{a_{N + 2}}}}{{{a_N}}}{b_{N + 2}} \cr & {b_N} = {c_N} + \frac{{{a_{N + 1}}}}{{{a_N}}}{c_{N + 1}} + \frac{{{a_{N + 2}}}}{{{a_N}}}{c_{N + 2}} + \frac{{{a_{N + 3}}}}{{{a_N}}}{b_{N + 3}} \cr} $$

Induction over $n$ we get

$${b_N} = {c_N} + \frac{{{a_{N + 1}}}}{{{a_N}}}{c_{N + 1}} + \frac{{{a_{N + 2}}}}{{{a_N}}}{c_{N + 2}} + \cdots + \frac{{{a_{N + n}}}}{{{a_N}}}{c_{N + n}} + \frac{{{a_{N + n + 1}}}}{{{a_N}}}{b_{N + n + 1}}$$

So

$$\eqalign{ & {b_N} \geqslant r\left( {1 + \frac{{{a_{N + 1}}}}{{{a_N}}} + \frac{{{a_{N + 2}}}}{{{a_N}}} + \cdots + \frac{{{a_{N + n}}}}{{{a_N}}}} \right) + \frac{{{a_{N + n + 1}}}}{{{a_N}}}{b_{N + n + 1}} \cr & {b_N} > r\left( {1 + \frac{{{a_{N + 1}}}}{{{a_N}}} + \frac{{{a_{N + 2}}}}{{{a_N}}} + \cdots + \frac{{{a_{N + n}}}}{{{a_N}}}} \right) \cr & \frac{{{a_N}{b_N}}}{r} > {a_N} + {a_{N + 1}} + {a_{N + 2}} + \cdots + {a_{N + n}} = \sum\limits_{k = N}^n {{a_k}} \cr} $$

As desired.

share|improve this question
    
This appears to be known as "Kummer's test", by the way. –  Dylan Moreland Mar 1 '12 at 4:35
    
@DylanMoreland Good to know. With this one can prove Raabe's test, and the prove Gauss's test. That's why it's so important to me. –  Pedro Tamaroff Mar 1 '12 at 4:40

2 Answers 2

up vote 4 down vote accepted

Here’s a hint for (1):

$$\begin{align*}b_N &= c_N + \frac{a_{N+1}b_{N+1}}{a_N}\\ &=c_N+\frac{a_{N+1}}{a_N}\left(c_{N+1}+\frac{a_{N+2}b_{N+2}}{a_{N+1}}\right)\\ &=c_N+\frac{a_{N+1}}{a_N}\cdot c_{N+1}+\frac{a_{N+2}}{a_N}\cdot b_{N+2}\\ &=c_N+\frac{a_{N+1}}{a_N}\cdot c_{N+1}+\frac{a_{N+2}}{a_N}\cdot c_{N+2}+\frac{a_{N+3}}{a_N}\cdot b_{N+3}\\ &\ge r\left(1+\frac{a_{N+1}}{a_N}+\frac{a_{N+2}}{a_N}\right)+\frac{a_{N+3}}{a_N}\cdot b_{N+3}\tag{why?}\\ &=\frac{r}{a_N}(a_N+a_{N+1}+a_{N+2})+\frac{a_{N+3}}{a_N}\cdot b_{N+3}\\ &>\frac{r}{a_N}(a_N+a_{N+1}+a_{N+2})\;.\tag{why?} \end{align*}$$

Generalize to get an upper bound on the partial sums of $\sum a_n$.

Added: A hint for (2): if $$b_n\le\frac{a_{n+1}b_{n+1}}{a_n}\;,$$ then $$\frac{a_n}{1/b_n}=a_nb_n\le a_{n+1}b_{n+1}=\frac{a_{n+1}}{1/b_{n+1}}\;.$$

share|improve this answer
    
I see. That will do the work! I'll finish it so I/you can focus on $2$. Thanks! –  Pedro Tamaroff Mar 1 '12 at 5:18
    
@Peter: (2) took me a little while, but I think that I’ve come up with a usable hint that doesn’t just give it away outright. –  Brian M. Scott Mar 1 '12 at 5:29

Look at the expression for $c_n$ again. Doesn't the way the $a_n$ and the $a_{n+1}$ are arranged remind you of a particular test? Try to make certain assumptions about $\{c_n\}$ and see if you can then set up some inequalities of your own. Also, the inequality in 1. simply says $\forall n \geq N,\ c_n > 0.$ Keeping this in mind, enumerate the various possibilities for the ratio $a_n \over a_{n+1}$ and $b_n$ and $b_{n+1}$.

share|improve this answer
    
Yes. I'm thinking about D'Alambert but I can't figure it out yet. –  Pedro Tamaroff Mar 1 '12 at 4:42
    
@PeterT.off Ok, the inequality in 1. does give away something important. I'll just edit the answer. –  ThisIsNotAnId Mar 1 '12 at 4:59

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.