I need to show that if the series $\sum_{n=1} a_n$ converges then the series $\sum_{n=1} \left( a_{2n} + a_{2n+1} \right)$ must also converge. Does it suffice to argue that since the two sums differ only by a single term $a_1$ and $a_n \in \mathbb{R}$ for all $n$ (since the first series converges), then the second must also converge? That is, since

$$ \sum_{n=1} a_n = a_1 + a_2 + \cdots $$


$$ \sum_{n=1} \left( a_{2n} + a_{2n+1} \right) = (a_2 + a_3) + (a_4 + a_5) + \cdots $$

we can write

$$ \sum_{n=1} a_n = a_1 + \sum_{n=1} \left( a_{2n} + a_{2n+1} \right) $$

and so clearly if the left sum converges, the right must as well.

Does this seem like a sufficiently rigorous argument for an upper-division real analysis course? My class is using "Elementary Analysis: The Theory of Calculus," by the way.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ just write that convergence of $\sum u_n$ is equivalent to the existence of $\lim \sum_{k=1}^n u_k$. $\endgroup$ – mookid Mar 16 '14 at 23:10

Hint: The sequence of partial sums of $$ \sum_{n=1}^\infty a_{2n}+a_{2n+1} $$ is a subsequence of the sequence of partial sums of $$ \sum_{n=2}^\infty a_n $$

  • $\begingroup$ But what if you consider $(a_n) = (10000, 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, \dots)$ $\endgroup$ – Rahul Shankar Mar 17 '14 at 1:57
  • $\begingroup$ Neither of the sums above contain $a_1$, so the partial sums of the top series are $$(3/4,15/16,63/64,\dots)$$ and the partial sums of the bottom series are $$(1/2,\color{#C00000}{3/4},7/8,\color{#C00000}{15/16},31/32,\color{#C00000}{63/64},\dots)$$ So you see the partial sums of the first are a subsequence of the partial sums of the second. $\endgroup$ – robjohn Mar 17 '14 at 7:15

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.