4
$\begingroup$

Let $(a_n)$ and $(b_n)$ be Cauchy sequences of rationals. Then $(a_nb_n)$ is a Cauchy sequence.

Does my attempt look fine or contain logical flaws/gaps? Any suggestion is greatly appreciated. Thank you for your help!


My attempt:

Lemma: If $(a_n)$ is a Cauchy sequence of rationals, then for all $n \in \Bbb N$, $|a_n| < A$ for some $A \in \Bbb Q$.

By lemma, there exists $A$ such that $|a_n| < A$ and $|b_n| < A$ for all $n \in \Bbb N$.

For a given $\epsilon >0$, take an integer $N$ such that $|b_n-b_m|<\dfrac{\epsilon}{2A}$ and $|a_n-a_m|<\dfrac{\epsilon}{2A}$ for all $n>N$.

$\begin{align} |a_nb_n-a_mb_m| &=|a_n(b_n-b_m) + b_m(a_n-a_m)|\\ &\le |a_n(b_n-b_m)| + |b_m(a_n-a_m)|\\ &= |a_n||b_n-b_m| + |b_m||a_n-a_m|\\ &< A\dfrac{\epsilon}{2A}+ A\dfrac{\epsilon}{2A}\\ &=\epsilon \end{align}$

Hence $(a_nb_n)$ is a Cauchy sequence.

$\endgroup$
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ It looks fine to me. $\endgroup$ – José Carlos Santos Jan 30 at 16:00
  • $\begingroup$ By the way: The proof works exactly the same for complex sequences. It is also irrelevant that the number $A$ is rational. $\endgroup$ – Mars Plastic Jan 30 at 16:06
2
$\begingroup$

This looks good. Well done.

Just because there is always room for improvement, I have a tiny nit-pick. When you take $N$, you could mention explicitly that it is guaranteed to exist because $a_n$ and $b_n$ are both Cauchy.

$\endgroup$

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.