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

I'm confused about the reasoning behind Cauchy's root test for convergence of infinite series. It states that for any series $\{a_n\}$, if $C = \limsup_{n\rightarrow\infty}{\sqrt[n]{|a_n|}} < 1$, then the series is absolutely convergent. If $C > 1$ the series diverges, and otherwise the test is inconclusive.

The proof states that if $\sqrt[n]{|a_n|} < k < 1$, $\forall_n \ | \ n > N$, then it is also true that $|a_n| < k^n$. This implies that $\sum_{i=N}^\infty{|a_i|}$ and $\sum_{i=N}^\infty{k^i}$ either both converge or diverge, and since $k < 1$, the second series converges and thus so does $\sum{|a_n|}$ (since $\sum_{i=0}^N{|a_i|}$ will always be finite).

This proof seems to make sense to me for $C = \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}{\sqrt[n]{|a_n|}}$, why does it require $\limsup$?

share|cite|improve this question
$\limsup$ always exists, $\lim$ does not always exist. – Daniel Fischer Aug 29 '14 at 23:51
@DanielFischer I actually know very little about $\limsup$, could you please elaborate on why? – user3002473 Aug 29 '14 at 23:52
$\limsup$ is a limit of a decreasing sequence. Thus by the monotone convergence theorem it has a limit (possibly an infinite one) for any sequence. – Ian Aug 29 '14 at 23:59
$\limsup x_n$ is the largest accumulation point of the sequence $(x_n)$ [possibly $+\infty$]. Every sequence of real numbers has an accumulation point in $[-\infty,+\infty]$, and it converges [improperly, possibly] if and only if it has only one accumulation point. If the sequence converges, then $\limsup x_n = \lim x_n = \liminf x_n$. Otherwise, we have $\liminf x_n < \limsup x_n$, and for every $k > \limsup x_n$, there is an $N$ such that $x_n < k$ for all $n\geqslant N$ (analogously for $c < \liminf x_n$, then $x_n > c$ for all large enough $n$). – Daniel Fischer Aug 29 '14 at 23:59
That makes sense, thank you both! – user3002473 Aug 30 '14 at 0:08

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.