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.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I am trying to complete the following question:

Suppose that $\lim_{n \to \infty} a_{n}=L$ and $L \neq 0$. Prove there is some $N$ such that $a_{n} \neq 0$ for all $n \geq N.$

Intuitively it makes sense. If after a certain point the numbers in the sequence $a_n$ can be made arbitrarily close to $L \neq 0$, then we should be able to find an $N$ for which $a_n \neq 0$ for $n \geq N.$

Let $L$ be represented by an infinite decimal expansion, then

$$L = x_{0}.x_{1}x_{2}x_{3}x_{4}x_{5}x_{6} \cdots $$

where for all $i \geq 1$, $x_i \in \left \{ 0,1,...,9 \right \}$, and $i \in \mathbb{I}$. Furthermore, because $L \neq 0$, there must be at least one $x_i \neq 0$. Now, let the first nonzero $x_i$ occur in the $k^{th}$ decimal place.

I know that $a_n \to L$ as $n \to \infty$. As such, for every $\epsilon > 0$, there is an integer $N = N(\epsilon)$ such that

$$|a_n - L| < \epsilon$$

for all $n \geq N$. Let $\epsilon = \frac{1}{10^{k+1}}$, then we have

$$L - \epsilon < a_n < L + \epsilon$$

$$x_{0}.x_{1}x_{2}x_{3} \cdots x_{k} \cdots - \frac{1}{10^{k+1}} < a_n < x_{0}.x_{1}x_{2}x_{3} \cdots x_{k} \cdots + \frac{1}{10^{k+1}}$$

$$(0.000 \cdots x_{k} \cdots) - \underbrace{0.000...0}_\text{k+1}1 < a_n < (0.000 \cdots x_{k} \cdots) + \underbrace{0.000...0}_\text{k+1}1$$

This should show that $a_n$ can be made to fall within an interval that does not contain zero for $n \geq N$. Does my reasoning make sense?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

Yes your proof is correct.
Yet there is an easier way:
pick $\epsilon=\frac{|L|}{2}>0$ (actually any $0<\epsilon<|L|$ will do, as the one in your proof.).

share|cite|improve this answer

You can make this argument a lot more simple by just saying that, by definition of convergence, you can choose $\epsilon = d(L,0)$, where d is the metric on the appropriate space. Then, by convergence, $\exists N \in \mathbb{N}$ s.t. $d(L,a_n) < \epsilon$ for all $n \geq N$. Then, for these $a_n$, you'll see that they cannot be equal to zero.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.