Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

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

If we know that $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}a_n$ converges,

what (if anything) can be known about $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{a_n}$ ?

I understand that convergence means the summation adds up to a number so this is the statement I have come up with so far:

if the number $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}a_n$ converges to is $< 0$ or $> 0$ then $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{a_n}$ converges also. otherwise if the number $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}a_n$ converges to $= 0$, $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{a_n}$ does not converge.

share|cite|improve this question
Given that you know that $a_n \to 0$ is necessary for convergence, you can conclude that ... – t.b. Jul 28 '11 at 15:44
Must $an → 0$ always be true, Could $an → 1 (2,3 etc.)$ not also mean convergence? – Matt Jul 28 '11 at 15:49
Matt: It is indeed a necessary (but not usually sufficient) condition for the series $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} a_n$ to converge, that we have $a_n \to 0$. For note that $a_n = s_n - s_{n-1}$, where $s_n$ is the $n$-th partial sum of the series. – Geoff Robinson Jul 28 '11 at 15:52
To continue on @Theo"s comment: the series $\sum a_n$ converges iff the sequence $(A_n)$ converges to a finite limit, where $A_n=a_1+\cdots+a_n$. Now, if $(A_n)$ converges to a finite limit, you know that $A_{n+1}-A_n$ converges to... – Did Jul 28 '11 at 15:54
If $\sum a_n$ converges then it must absolutely be true that $a_n\to 0$. How are the partial sums supposed to get trapped within arbitrarily small neighborhoods of a final limit if the increments don't eventually get smaller and smaller? – anon Jul 28 '11 at 15:55
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Hint: you might think about the series for $\ln 2: \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^n}{n}$, which converges to a non-zero value.

share|cite|improve this answer
Of all the nonzero series you could have chosen, why did you have to choose the standard-example conditionally convergent one? :) – anon Jul 28 '11 at 16:33
@anon: because standard examples come to mind easily. But I guess $2^{-n}$ would have worked as well. – Ross Millikan Jul 28 '11 at 16:38

Note that the OP asks "what (if anything) can be known about...". If the $a_i > 0$, by the harmonic-arithmetic mean inequality, $$(\sum_{n=1}^m a_n)/m \ge ((\sum_{n=1}^m 1/a_n)/m)^{-1}$$ or $$\sum_{n=1}^m 1/a_n \ge m^2/\sum_{n=1}^m a_n$$ We thus can get a lower bound on the sum, instead of an upper bound. If $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} a_n$ converges, this shows that $\sum_{n=1}^m 1/a_n$ grows like $m^2$.

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.