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.

Question is this: Let $a_n$ be a sequence of real numbers. Prove that if $a_n$ is bounded below and has no cluster points then $a_n$ → ∞.

I could not really find a way to prove it. Could you give me a hand?

Regards, Amadeus

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer 1

up vote 6 down vote accepted

HINT: If $a_n\not\to\infty$, then the sequence has an infinite subsequence that is bounded above. (Why?) That subsequence is actually a bounded sequence. What do you know about cluster points of bounded sequences?

Added: Suppose that $a_n\not\to\infty$. Then there is some $M$ such that for all $m\in\Bbb N$ there is a $k\ge m$ with $a_k<M$. Let $A=\{k\in\Bbb N:a_k<M\}$ clearly $A$ is infinite, so we can list it as $A=\{n_k:k\in\Bbb N\}$ in such a way that $n_0<n_1<n_2<\ldots~$. We now have a subsequence $\sigma=\langle a_{n_k}:k\in\Bbb N\rangle$ of the original sequence.

The original sequence is bounded below by hypothesis, so $\sigma$ is also bounded below, and by construction $\sigma$ is bounded above by $M$. Being a bounded sequence in $\Bbb R$, $\sigma$ has a convergent subsequence $\sigma'=\langle a_{n_{k_i}}:i\in\Bbb N\rangle$; let $x$ be the limit of $\sigma'$.

Can each $\epsilon>0$ there is an $m_\epsilon\in\Bbb N$ such that $|x-x_{n_{k_i}}|<\epsilon$ whenever $i\ge m_\epsilon$; that’s just the definition of convergence. But that means that for each $\epsilon>0$, infinitely many terms of the original sequence are in the interval $(x-\epsilon,x+\epsilon)$, i.e., $x$ is a cluster point of the original sequence.

We’ve shown that if $a_n\not\to\infty$, then the sequence has a cluster point; it follows immediately that if it has no cluster point, then $a_n\to\infty$, by taking the contrapositive.

share|improve this answer
    
Actually $a_n\not\to\infty$ does not imply that it's bounded above. Take, for instance, $a_{2n-1}=0$, $a_{2n}=2n$. –  nonpop Nov 4 '12 at 19:57
    
@nonpop: You’re right, of course. I’ll make the minor fix required. (Somehow I was thinking that it was monotone.) –  Brian M. Scott Nov 4 '12 at 20:00
    
@BrianM.Scott If I am not wrong, if a sequence is bounded then according to Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem, a cluster point should exist right? –  Amadeus Bachmann Nov 4 '12 at 20:08
    
@Zxy: That’s exactly right. And if the subsequence has a cluster point, what about the original sequence? –  Brian M. Scott Nov 4 '12 at 20:10
    
@BrianM.Scott then the original sequence has a limit and therefore it is convergent? –  Xentius Nov 4 '12 at 20:42
show 5 more comments

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.