Prove: Convergent sequences are bounded

I don't understand this one part in the proof for convergent sequences are bounded.

Proof:

Let $$s_n$$ be a convergent sequence, and let $$\lim s_n = s$$. Then taking $$\epsilon = 1$$ we have:

$$n > N \implies |s_n - s| < 1$$

From the triangle inequality we see that: $$n > N \implies|s_n| - |s| < 1 \iff |s_n| < |s| + 1$$.

Define $$M= \max\{|s|+1, |s_1|, |s_2|, ..., |s_N|\}$$. Then we have $$|s_n| \leq M$$ for all $$n \in N$$.

I do not understand the defining $$M$$ part. Why not just take $$|s| + 1$$ as the bound, since for $$n > N \implies |s_n| < |s| + 1$$?

• Okay, this is may be a strange question, but wouldn't the triangle inequality say: $|s_{n}-s| \leq |s_{n}|+|s|$? Oct 6 '15 at 1:12
• Actually, no. Using the standard Triangle Inequality here is a tad naïve. I believe what Ross implies is $\vert s_n - s\vert \ge \vert s_n \vert - \vert s \vert < 1 \implies \vert s_n \vert < 1 + \vert s\vert$
– user203509
Feb 23 '16 at 23:54
• We could still use Triangle Inequality here. Begin with $|s_{n}| = |s_{n}-s+s| \leq |s_{n}-s|+|s|$, which implies $|s_{n}| - |s| \leq |s_{n}-s|$. It follows that $|s_{n}| - |s| \leq |s_{n}-s| < 1$.
– user156100
Mar 1 '16 at 6:13
• @Greg.Paul I doubt you still care and you probably know this already, but for others, the result $|s_n|-|s|\leq|s_n-s|$ follows as in nexolute's comment above and is called the Reverse Triangle Inequality. It is usually invoked without proof as it is considered well-known. Jan 2 '17 at 16:04

$|s|+1$ is a bound for $a_n$ when $n > N$. We want a bound that applies to all $n \in \mathbb{N}$. To get this bound, we take the supremum of $|s|+1$ and all terms of $|a_n|$ when $n \le N$. Since the set we're taking the supremum of is finite, we're guaranteed to have a finite bound $M$.
• Taking the Max ensures that we take into account elements of $a_n$ for $n \leq N$ that could be bigger than $|s| + 1$? Oct 15 '12 at 3:05
• Instead of triangle inequality, can we do it like this ? $s-1<s_n<s+1$ whenever $n>N$. Now take lower bound of sequence to be $\text{min}\{s_1,s_2,...,s_N,s-1\}$ and upper bound of sequence to be $\text{max}\{s_1,s_2,...,s_N,s+1\}$. Aug 16 '19 at 14:36
Because you want to be sure that the bound is large enough to ensure that $|s_n|\le M$ for all $n\in\Bbb N$, not just for all $n>N$. Taking $M\ge|s|+1$ ensures that the only possible exceptions to $|s_n|\le M$ are $s_1,\dots,s_N$, and taking $M\ge\max\{|s_1|,\dots,|s_N|\}$ takes care of these as well.
• Do you mean the following : as |$S_{n}-S$|<$1$ holds only when $n>N$ so is |$S_{n}$|<|$S$|+$1$. Which implies that there might be another number $M$ such that M>|S|+1 s.t. it is the bounded. So you are assuming for some $|S_{k}|$ where k is less than equal to $N$ , we can not guarantee that the current upperbound $|S|+1$ holds so you take the max of all the such $|S_{k}|$ and again there is chance between that max{$|S_{k}|$} and the $|S|+1$ so again take the max and name that $M$, NOW MY QUESTION is how you can guarantee |$S_{n}$|<= M for all n, why not strict inequality? Feb 23 '19 at 9:40