1
$\begingroup$

Let $\sum a_n$ be a series of positive real numbers, n going from 0 to $\infty$, such that the series DOES NOT converge. Let $\left\{z_n\right\}$, $n\geq 0$ be a sequence of complex numbers. Form an associated sequence $\left\{w_n\right\}$ where $$ w_n = \frac{\sum_{l=0}^n a_l z_l}{\sum_{l=0}^n a_l} $$ Then prove that:

  1. if the sequence $\left\{z_n\right\}$ is convergent to some complex number $a$, then $w_n$ also converges to a.
  2. if $\left\{z_n\right\}$ is a real sequence and $lim_{n\to\infty} z_n = +\infty$, then $lim_{n\to\infty} w_n = +\infty$, as well.

Sorry for the awkward typing. Please ask for any clarifications. Thanks a lot.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The usual epsilon-delta approach works nicely here. What have you tried? $\endgroup$ – Did Feb 20 '14 at 8:52
  • $\begingroup$ I couldn't start the question. $\endgroup$ – user130113 Feb 20 '14 at 8:59
  • $\begingroup$ Have you solved any other exercise using the epsilon-delta approach? $\endgroup$ – Did Feb 20 '14 at 9:01
  • $\begingroup$ Nope. Could you please guide me through the proof? I am really new with this stuff and still learning. $\endgroup$ – user130113 Feb 20 '14 at 9:04
  • $\begingroup$ Try the theorem of Cesaro-Stolz, the discrete version of l'Hopitals rule. $\endgroup$ – LutzL Feb 20 '14 at 9:07
1
$\begingroup$

Without invoking Cesaro-Stolz, "epsilon-delta" argument:

Suppose $z_n \to a$. Let $S_n = \sum_{k=0}^n a_k$. We have $$ \left|w_n - a\right|=\left|\frac{\sum_{k=0}^n a_k \left|z_k - a\right|}{\sum_{k=0}^n a_k}\right|\leq \frac{1}{S_n}\sum_{k=0}^n a_k \left|z_k - a\right| $$ Fix $\varepsilon > 0$. Since $z_k\to a$, there is $N$ such that for $n>N$ we have $\left|z_n - a\right|<\varepsilon/2$. Now,

$$ \left|w_n-a\right|\leq \frac{1}{S_n}\sum_{k=0}^N a_k \left|z_k - a\right|+ \frac{1}{S_n}\sum_{k=N+1}^n a_k \left|z_k - a\right| $$

But $S_n\to\infty$ by assumption (positive terms, does not converge), so the first part tends to $0$ (sum remains fixed). And $$ \frac{1}{S_n}\sum_{k=N+1}^n a_k \left|z_k - a\right|< \frac{1}{S_n}\sum_{k=N+1}^n a_k \frac{\varepsilon}{2}= \frac{\varepsilon}{2S_n}\sum_{k=N+1}^n a_k $$

Now, $$ \sum_{k=N+1}^n a_k = \sum_{k=N+1}^n a_k + \sum_{k=0}^N a_k - \sum_{k=0}^N a_k = \sum_{k=0}^n a_k - \sum_{k=0}^N a_k = S_n - S_N $$ and so $$ \frac{1}{S_n}\sum_{k=N+1}^n a_k=\frac{S_n - S_N}{S_n}=1-\frac{S_N}{S_n}<1 $$ therefore $$ \frac{\varepsilon}{2S_n}\sum_{k=N+1}^n a_k<\frac{\varepsilon}{2} $$ Hence, for large enough $n$, $\left|w_n-a\right|<\varepsilon$.

Suppose now $z_n\to+\infty$. Fix $M > 0$. From some point, $z_n > M + 1$. Similar argument shows, that part of sum before that point can be neglected (bounded in absolute value by $\varepsilon$), and after that it's big enough to guarantee that limit is greater than $M$:

$$ \frac{1}{S_n}\left|\sum_{k=0}^N a_k z_k\right|\to 0 $$ as $n\to \infty$, since $N$ remains fixed, and $S_n\to\infty$. For large enough $n$ it is thus bounded by $\varepsilon$. $$ \frac{1}{S_n}\sum_{k=N+1}^n a_k z_k \geq \frac{1}{S_n}\sum_{k=N+1}^n a_k (M+1)=\frac{S_n - S_N}{S_n}(M+1)>M+\varepsilon $$

eventually, since $S_N/S_n\to 0$. Finally,

$$ w_n=\frac{1}{S_n}\sum_{k=0}^n a_k z_k\geq \frac{1}{S_n}\sum_{k=N+1}^n a_k z_k-\frac{1}{S_n}\left|\sum_{k=0}^N a_k z_k\right|>M+\varepsilon-\varepsilon=M $$

Therefore, $w_n > M$ for large enough $n$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ This looks great. Thanks a lot. $\endgroup$ – user130113 Feb 20 '14 at 17:24
  • $\begingroup$ Could you please explain why in the 3rd statement of equations, you said that ONLY the first part tends to zero and the second part doesn't? $\endgroup$ – user130113 Feb 21 '14 at 1:54
  • $\begingroup$ The first part is something constant divided by $S_n$, so it obviously tends to 0. The second part does as well, it's just less obvious. $\endgroup$ – Marcin Łoś Feb 21 '14 at 1:57
  • $\begingroup$ ok, so ∑ a_k |z_k - a| = ∑ a_k (e/2) = constant? How, can you please elaborate? Also, how did you get (S_n - S_N)/S_n? Sorry for so many questions. It just doesn't seem very obvious to me. $\endgroup$ – user130113 Feb 21 '14 at 2:08
  • $\begingroup$ I've edited the response to include more details. And I don't mind the questions - they help to improve the answer, after all. Some steps were/are sketchy, so it's no wonder they might require clarification. $\endgroup$ – Marcin Łoś Feb 21 '14 at 2:23
0
$\begingroup$

By the theorem of Cesaro-Stolz, under the given assumptions and with any second series $\sum b_k$,

$\frac{\sum_{k=1}^nb_k}{\sum_{k=1}^na_k}$ converges to the limit of $\frac{b_n}{a_n}$,

if this second limit exists. In this case, with $b_n=a_nz_n$, the fraction reproduces the sequence $z_n=\frac{b_n}{a_n}$.

$\endgroup$

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.