2
$\begingroup$

What is wrong with the proof below?

Suppose $\displaystyle\sum_{n=1}^\infty a_n$ converges. Then it converges absolutely.

Proof. $\quad \forall_{\epsilon>0}\ \exists_{N}\ m\geq n \geq N \Rightarrow \left\lvert x_m - x_n \right\rvert < \epsilon \quad$ (Cauchy property)

But $\left\lvert \lvert x_m \rvert - \lvert x_n \rvert \right\rvert \leq \left\lvert x_m - x_n \right\rvert \Rightarrow \left\lvert \lvert x_m \rvert - \lvert x_n \rvert \right\rvert < \epsilon \qquad$ q.e.d.

$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ First you have to know the difference between sequence and series. $\endgroup$ – corindo Sep 21 '15 at 7:54
3
$\begingroup$

I assume that $x_n=a_1+\dots+a_n$. To prove that $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}|a_n|$ converges, you have to prove (if you wish) that for all $\epsilon>0$ $\exists N$ such that for all $m\geq n\geq N$ $|a_n|+\dots +|a_m|<\epsilon$. You only proved that $||a_0+\dots +a_m|-|a_0+\dots +a_n||<\epsilon$.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

As the error has been pointed out, I provide a counterexample: The series $\sum_{n \geq 1} (-1)^{n-1}\frac{1}{n}$ converges by Leibniz's rule, but $\sum_{n\geq 1}\frac{1}{n}$ diverges.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

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.