In posting this question, I noticed a lot of 'similar' threads pop up, but felt that they required a fundamentally different approach.

If any of you feel differently, please feel free to vote this thread as a duplicate and I will delete it.

Here is my approach, I would appreciate help/correction where relevant, as I am unsure of how robust my answer is:

If $\sum a_n$ converges absolutely, then we have that $\sum |a_n|$ converges. This implies that $\sum a_n$ also converges, and that the sequence $(a_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}}\to 0$.$^{(1)}$

This means that the sequence $(a_n)$ is bounded and monotone (decreasing), and as such convergent.

Looking at $(a_{2n})$ we notice it is a sub-sequence of $(a_n)$ and converges to the same value (Bolzano-Weiestrass).$^{(2)}$

Then the partial sums $(s_{2n}) \to A$ and thus $\sum a_{2n} = A$

Is this sufficient? I feel it is a little wishy/washy in using bolzano-weistrass.

Do I need to formally show $(a_{2n})$ is a sub-sequence of $(a_n)$

Any tips/hints/corrections are greatly appreciated.

$^{(1),}$$^{(2)}$ - I am not required to show these results, as quoting the theorem from my notes is considered sufficient by my professor.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your use of Bolzano Weierstrass is useless in this context. Moreover, you are confusing $a_1 + a_2 + \dots + a_{2n} = \sum_{k=1}^{2n} a_k$ with $a_2 + a_4 + \dots + a_{2n} = \sum_{k=1}^n a_{2k}$: these two sequences (you are denoting both of them with the same symbol $s_{2n}$) are clearly different, so your argument makes no sense. $\endgroup$ – Crostul Apr 9 '15 at 18:15
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks @Crostul I had a feeling this was the case (re: denoting the sequences incorrectly). I just want to clarify, instead of using $(s_{2n}) \to A$ to denote the partial sums of $\sum a_{2n}$, what should I have done? Let $b_n = a_{2n}$ and $(t_k)$ be the partial sums of $b_n$ ? $\endgroup$ – elbarto Apr 9 '15 at 19:35

$$ \sum_{n\in \mathbb{N}} |a_{2n}| \leq \sum_{n\in \mathbb{N}}|a_n| < \infty$$

  • $\begingroup$ I like this idea, it is much more elegant. Would you say there were any errors in my reasoning, however? $\endgroup$ – elbarto Apr 9 '15 at 17:30

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.