Let $x_n$ be a sequence of real numbers.

Definition: $x \in \mathbb R \cup \{-\infty,\infty\}$ is a limit point of a sequence $x_n$ if there is a subsequence $x_{n_k}$ of our sequence such that $x_{n_k} \to x$.

If $A= \{x \in \mathbb R \cup \{-\infty,\infty\} \mid x \text { is a limit point of }x_n\}$, prove that $A$ is not empty.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is "essentially" (but not the same as) the Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem. Do you know this theorem? What results are you allowed to use? $\endgroup$
    – Srivatsan
    Dec 1, 2011 at 19:08
  • $\begingroup$ Have you considered proving $\mathbb{R} \cup \{ - \infty, + \infty\}$ is compact? $\endgroup$ Dec 1, 2011 at 19:10
  • $\begingroup$ Isn't Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem for bounded sequences? Well, I am allowed to use pretty much everything I know. I am only starting to learn topology. $\endgroup$ Dec 1, 2011 at 19:12
  • $\begingroup$ Could you please expand that ideea, Isaac S.? I don't really understand that notion. $\endgroup$ Dec 1, 2011 at 19:16
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @MihaiBogdan So, if Bolzano-Weierstraß works for bounded sequences, maybe you can treat unbounded sequences separately. $\endgroup$
    – Phira
    Dec 1, 2011 at 19:18

4 Answers 4


A proof sketch assuming Bolzano-Weierstrass.

  1. Show that $x_n$ is bounded above if and only if $\infty$ is not a limit point of $x_n$.

  2. Reversing the above argument, show that $x_n$ is bounded from below if and only if $- \infty$ is not a limit point.

  3. From (1.) and (2.), conclude that if neither $\infty$ nor $-\infty$ is a limit point of $x_n$, then $x_n$ is bounded. Further, using Bolzano-Weierstrass, conclude that if neither $\infty$ nor $-\infty$ is a limit point of $x_n$, then $x_n$ has a subsequence converging to some limit $x \in \mathbb R$.

To summarize the argument, the key idea is that the sequence is

  • either unbounded, in which case one of $+\infty$ and $-\infty$ is a limit point;
  • or it's bounded, in which case Bolzano-Weierstrass shows the existence of a limit point in $\mathbb R$.

Note: Martin's answer explains the idea behind (1.). :-)


If the sequence is bounded, then you can invoke Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem.

So we can assume it is unbounded. Let us assume it is not bounded from above. (The symmetric case is similar.)

Thus for every $C$ there exists $n$ such that $x_n>C$.

Start with $C_1=1$ and choose $n_1$ such that $x_{n_1}>C_1=1$.

Now choose $C_2=2+\max\{x_j\; : \; j\le n_1\}$. Obviously $C_2\ge 2$ and you can choose $n_2$ such that $n_2>n_1$ and $x_{n_2}>C_2$.

You continue by induction. In the $k$-th step you choose $C_k=k+\max\{x_j \; : \; j\le n_k\}$. This means that $C_k\ge k$ and you there exists $n_{k+1}>n_k$ with $x_{n_k}>C_k$.

In this way you obtain a subsequence $n_k$ such that $x_{n_k} \ge k$. This implies that this subsequence converges to $+\infty$.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thank you Martin Sleziak, I understand this proof. Thanks, everyone. $\endgroup$ Dec 1, 2011 at 19:28

$\arctan : [-\infty,\infty] \rightarrow [-\pi/2,\pi/2]$. The sequence $\{x_n\}_{n=1}^\infty \subseteq \mathbb{R}$ has a limit point in $[-\infty,\infty]$ if and only if the sequence $\{\arctan x_n\}_{n=1}^\infty \subseteq [-\pi/2,\pi/2]$ has a limit point in $[-\pi/2,\pi/2]$. Bolzano-Weierstrass takes care of that.


Define $y_n = \sup \{ x_n, x_{n+1}, x_{n+2}, \cdots \} .$ Then $y_n$ is a monotone decreasing sequence and hence $ Y = \displaystyle \lim_{n\to\infty} y_n$ exists (possibly $-\infty$).

The claim is that $ Y \in A .$ If $Y$ is finite, then argue as follow: For any $\epsilon > 0 $, by the definition of supremum for each $n\in \mathbb{N}$ we can find $ n_k \geq n $ such that $ |y_n - x_{n_k} | < \frac{\epsilon}{2}.$ By definition of limit, for some $n_0 \in\mathbb{N}$ we have $ |Y - y_n| < \frac{\epsilon}{2} $ for all $ n > n_0.$ Thus for all $n> n_0$, $$ |Y - x_{n_k}| \leq |Y-y_n| + |y_n - x_{n_k}| < \epsilon.$$ Thus, $ x_{n_k} \to Y.$

I leave the case where $ Y= -\infty$ to you.

  • $\begingroup$ Note that it is possible that all $y_n$'s are equal to $+\infty$. (E.g. the sequence $x_n=n$.) So perhaps you should deal with the case $Y=\infty$ too. (Or at least you should write that this case is also left to the reader.) $\endgroup$ Dec 1, 2011 at 20:05

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.