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

Let $f(b, q)$ be the reciprocal proportion of naturals less than $b$ which are not divisible by any prime less than $q$. Note that $\displaystyle \lim_{q \to \infty} f(b, q) = b$, while $\displaystyle \lim_{b \to \infty} f(b, q)$ is the sum of the reciprocals of those positive integers with prime factors all less than $q$. Thus, $\displaystyle \lim_{b \to \infty} \lim_{q \to \infty} f(b, q) = \infty$, while $\displaystyle \lim_{q \to \infty} \lim_{b \to \infty} f(b, q)$ is the harmonic series.

Given that we already know the harmonic series diverges, we may conclude that these limits commute, but is there any way to reason in the opposite order? That is, is there any good reason that these limits should commute, such that we can conclude by this reasoning that the harmonic series must diverge?

share|cite|improve this question

Your Answer


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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.