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'm trying to compute the following limit:

$\displaystyle \lim_{n \to \infty} \int_{0}^{\infty} (1+\frac{x}{n})^{(-n)} \sin(x/n) dx$

Clearly the integrand converges to 0 pointwise so the trick is to find the dominating function. So for simplicity let ${f_{n}}$ denote the sequence of functions of the integrand: it is not hard to see that $|f_{n}| \leq (1+x/3)^{-3}x$ for all $n\geq 3$ and the latter function is integrable on $(0,\infty)$. But doesn't Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem requires to bound it for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$? What happens if we can't obtain a dominating function for $n=1$ or $n=2$ ? Can you please clarify this? I have read in a book that you can drop some terms, say $n=1,2,3$ and the bound the rest , but why is this possible? doesn't this violates the hypothesis of Lebesgue's theorem?

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

The limit of a sequence $\{ a_{n} : n \geq 1\}$ is the same as that of $\{ a_{n+2} : n \geq 1 \}$.

share|improve this answer

There are a couple of ways to think about it; as acarchau says, since you are concerned only about the limit, and the "tail" has the same limit, it is enough to consider the tail. Equivalently: the limit of a sequence depends only on what it is doing "eventually". Any amount of "weird" stuff that happens up to a finite bound $N$ is irrelevant (that is, if the sequence is "nice" for all $n\geq N$, then that is enough, because as far as the limit is concerned, we don't care what happens at $n=1$, $n=2,\ldots,n=N-1$).

Or, consider the sequence of functions $\{g_n\}$, where $g_n(x) = f_{N+n}(x)$. Then the hypothesis of Lebesgue's Theorem hold exactly as written for $g_n(x)$, so we know that we can get the conclusion for the $g_n$. Now rewrite $g_n$ as $f_{N+n}$, and do a change of variable $m=N+n$; then $m\to\infty$ as $n\to\infty$, so the limit of $f_{N+n}$ as $n\to\infty$ is the same as the limit of $f_m$ as $m\to\infty$, giving the result.

But all in all, it's always the same moral: what happens at finitely many terms "at the beginning" does not affect the end behavior of a sequence. Only the "eventual" behavior matters.

share|improve this answer
    
Got it now! Thank you, I was making things harder, thanks again,very clear explanation. –  student Nov 5 '10 at 4:23

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.