Given that $x_1 = 1$ and $x_{n+1}=x_{n}+ 1/x_{n}^{2}$. Find the limit of the sequence.

Let $ c $ be the limit of the sequence, then $ c=c+\frac{1}{c^2} $, that means $ \frac{1}{c^2}=0 $. That can't be like that.What is wrong???

  • $\begingroup$ What is the initial value $x_1$? What happens if $x_1 = -1$? $\endgroup$ – user99914 Nov 9 '13 at 19:57
  • $\begingroup$ If you write $x_{n+1} = (x_n^3 + 1)/(x_n^2)$ what will happen as n $\rightarrow \infty$? John shows you one case. What happens if $x_1$ = 1/2? -1/2? 1? 2? You've got several cases here. $\endgroup$ – Betty Mock Nov 9 '13 at 20:05
  • $\begingroup$ The initial value is $x_{1}=1$ $\endgroup$ – evinda Nov 9 '13 at 20:08
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Have you considered that the sequence might not converge to a real number? $\endgroup$ – Daniel Fischer Nov 9 '13 at 20:19
  • $\begingroup$ I don't know..but the exercise asks me to find the limit,so I suppose that the sequence converges to a real number. $\endgroup$ – evinda Nov 9 '13 at 20:28

Suppose the sequence converges to $c$. Can you see how your definition of the sequence implies that $c>0$?

Then for any $\epsilon>0$, the sequence eventually exceeds $c-\epsilon$.

If $c-\epsilon < x_n \le c$ then $x_n+\dfrac 1 {x_n^2}>{?}+\dfrac 1 {?}$. Can you fill in the blanks and see how this leads to a contradiction?

Showing the sequence increases without bound

Every increasing sequence of real numbers that is bounded above converges. As $(x_n)$ is an increasing sequence of real numbers that does not converge, it must be unbounded above.

  • $\begingroup$ If $ c-ε<x_{n}<=c $ then $ x_{n}+\frac{1}{x_{n}^2}>c-ε+c^2$ . What does this mean? That the sequence isn't bounded above? $\endgroup$ – evinda Nov 9 '13 at 21:52
  • $\begingroup$ @evinda, you got the last term wrong. Think about what you can set $\epsilon$ to. $\endgroup$ – dfeuer Nov 9 '13 at 22:02
  • $\begingroup$ What do you mean?? :/ $\endgroup$ – evinda Nov 10 '13 at 0:11
  • $\begingroup$ You made a minor error. The $c^2$ term should be $1/c^2$. Once you've fixed that, see if you can choose an $\epsilon$ for which the inequality does not hold, which will give you a contradiction. $\endgroup$ – dfeuer Nov 10 '13 at 0:32
  • $\begingroup$ Oh, sorry..you're right! Could you give a hint to choose an ε..I got really stuck right now. :/ $\endgroup$ – evinda Nov 10 '13 at 0:49

Notice $$x_{n+1}^3 = x_n^3 (1 + \frac{1}{x_n^3})^3 = x_n^3 + 3 + \frac{3}{x_n^3} + \frac{1}{x_n^6}$$ We have $x_{n+1}^3 - x_n^3 > 3$ for all $n$ and hence we can bound $x_n$ from below

$$x_n^3 \ge x_1^3 + 3(n-1) = 3n-2 \quad\implies\quad x_n \ge \sqrt[3]{3n-2}$$

As a result, the sequence $x_n$ diverges.

  • $\begingroup$ Minor nitpick: you should have $x_n^2$ in the denominator $\endgroup$ – Empy2 Nov 10 '13 at 7:24
  • $\begingroup$ @Michael $x_n + \frac{1}{x_n^2} = x_n (1+ \frac{1}{x_n^3})$ $\endgroup$ – achille hui Nov 10 '13 at 7:42
  • $\begingroup$ @achillehui Your inequality is "equivalent" to assume a 'slow' variation of $\displaystyle{\large x_{n}}$ and solve $\displaystyle{\large{{\rm d}x_{n} \over \dd n} = {1 \over x_{n}^{2}}}$ with the condition $\displaystyle{\large x_{1} = 1}$. That yields $\displaystyle{\large x_{n} \sim \sqrt[3]{3n - 2}}$. $\endgroup$ – Felix Marin Nov 11 '13 at 1:25
  • $\begingroup$ @FelixMartin Yup, that's actually the reason why I look at the behavior of $x_n^3$ instead of $x_n$. $\endgroup$ – achille hui Nov 11 '13 at 4:29

Since $x_{n+1}> x_n$ here, it implies that the limit of $x_n$ is either a finite number or goes to infinity.

The first case is impossible, as $$\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} x_n =l \in (1, \infty) \Rightarrow l+\frac{1}{l^2}=l \Rightarrow 1=0\text{(contradiction)}$$ Thus, $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} x_n = \infty$.

Added:(Proving that the sequence isn't bounded above)Since the sequence $x_n$ is increasing, then if it is convergent, it should have upper boundary and its limit is equal to its least upper bound (This means that if $l$ is an upper bound for $x_n$, for any other upper bound $L$ of $x_n$, we have $l \le L$). Suppose the limit of $x_n$ is $l$, which implies $x_n \lt l$. Also,by the definiton of convergent sequences, we have: $$\forall \epsilon\gt0, \exists N\gt0,\text{such that, }n\gt N, \left|x_n-l\right|\lt \epsilon$$

hence $l-\epsilon\lt x_n\lt l$. Let $\epsilon = \frac{1}{l^2}$,then by the given formula above: $$x_{n+1} = x_n + \frac{1}{x_n^2} \gt l-\epsilon + \frac{1}{l^2} = 1-\frac{1}{l^2}+\frac{1}{l^2} = l$$

which contradict to the fact that $x_{n+1} \lt l$. Hence, the upper bound do not exist,$x_n$ is divergent.

  • $\begingroup$ Could I also show that the limit of $x_{n}$ goes to infinity by proving that the sequence isn't bounded above? I tried to prove this doing the following: Since $x_{1}=1$ and the sequence is incresing, that means that $x>=1$ for each n. So $x_{n+1}=x_{n}+\frac{1}{x_{n}^2}>=1+1=2>=1$. Are my thoughts right? $\endgroup$ – evinda Nov 10 '13 at 0:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @evinda, the easiest thing is to use the fact that the sequence is increasing but does not have a limit. There are various ways to prove that it has no limit. sundaycat's approach uses continuity of $x\mapsto x+\frac 1{x^2}$ on $[1,\infty)$. My approach is a direct $\epsilon$-$N$ proof. You can do it in various ways. $\endgroup$ – dfeuer Nov 10 '13 at 0:37
  • $\begingroup$ @evinda In order to prove that the sequence isn't bounded you need to create an contradiction here, I just edited my answer. check the Added part.(Note, my second solution is the same as dfeuer's) $\endgroup$ – SundayCat Nov 10 '13 at 6:03
  • $\begingroup$ @sundaycat, you don't need to reproduce my approach to prove the sequence is unbounded. Your original proof implicitly uses continuity to show that the sequence does not converge: if $(x_n)$ converges to $c$, then $(x_n)$ must converge to $c+\frac1{c^c}$. Once you've proven the sequence does not converge, the fact that it is increasing immediately proves that it increases without bound. $\endgroup$ – dfeuer Nov 10 '13 at 6:11

$\newcommand{\+}{^{\dagger}}% \newcommand{\angles}[1]{\left\langle #1 \right\rangle}% \newcommand{\braces}[1]{\left\lbrace #1 \right\rbrace}% \newcommand{\bracks}[1]{\left\lbrack #1 \right\rbrack}% \newcommand{\dd}{{\rm d}}% \newcommand{\isdiv}{\,\left.\right\vert\,}% \newcommand{\ds}[1]{\displaystyle{#1}}% \newcommand{\equalby}[1]{{#1 \atop {= \atop \vphantom{\huge A}}}}% \newcommand{\expo}[1]{\,{\rm e}^{#1}\,}% \newcommand{\floor}[1]{\,\left\lfloor #1 \right\rfloor\,}% \newcommand{\ic}{{\rm i}}% \newcommand{\imp}{\Longrightarrow}% \newcommand{\ket}[1]{\left\vert #1\right\rangle}% \newcommand{\pars}[1]{\left( #1 \right)}% \newcommand{\partiald}[3][]{\frac{\partial^{#1} #2}{\partial #3^{#1}}} \newcommand{\pp}{{\cal P}}% \newcommand{\root}[2][]{\,\sqrt[#1]{\,#2\,}\,}% \newcommand{\sech}{\,{\rm sech}}% \newcommand{\sgn}{\,{\rm sgn}}% \newcommand{\totald}[3][]{\frac{{\rm d}^{#1} #2}{{\rm d} #3^{#1}}} \newcommand{\ul}[1]{\underline{#1}}% \newcommand{\verts}[1]{\left\vert #1 \right\vert}% \newcommand{\yy}{\Longleftrightarrow}$ $\large\tt Hint:$ $$ x_{n} = x_{n - 1} + {1 \over x_{n - 1}^{2}} = x_{n - 2} + {1 \over x_{n - 2}^{2}} + {1 \over x_{n - 1}^{2}} = \cdots = x_{1} + {1 \over x_{1}^{2}} + {1 \over x_{2}^{2}} + \cdots + {1 \over x_{n - 1}^{2}} $$

$$ x_{n} = x_{1} + \sum_{k = 1}^{n - 1}{1 \over x_{k}^{2}}\,\qquad n \geq 2 $$ If $\lim_{n \to \infty}x_{n}$ is finite, the 'generic serie term' should go to zero when $n \to \infty$: $\quad\lim_{k \to \infty}\pars{1/x_{k}^{2}} = 0$ which contradicts the initial statement. Then, $\lim_{n \to \infty}x_{n} = \infty$.


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.