I'm self-studying from the book Understanding Analysis by Stephen Abbott and have no idea how to do exercise 2.5.2 on page 57.

The exercise is as follows:

Prove that if an infinite series converges, then the associative property holds. Assume $a_1+a_2 + a_3+a_4 + a_5+\cdots$ converges to a limit $L$ (i.e., the sequence of partial sums $(s_n) \to L$). [This sentence is already confusing me; I don't understand why if $(a_n) \to L$, this implies that $(s_n) \to L$?] Show that any regrouping of the terms $$ (a_1 + a_2 + \cdots + a_{n_1}) + (a_{n_1+1} + \cdots + a_{n_2}) + (a_{n_2 + 1} + \cdots + a_{n_3}) + \cdots $$ leads to a series that also converges to $L$.

Now, I'm aware that it is best to show what I've tried so far, but I have no idea how to get started. Any insight is much appreciated.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ When he says that the series $a_1+a_2+\cdots$ converges to L, this means that $(s_n)\rightarrow L$, not that $(a_n)\rightarrow L$. To show the exercise, see what you can say about the partial sums for the series you get after grouping the terms. $\endgroup$ – user84413 Aug 15 '14 at 20:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The $n$th term in the sequence of partial sums is $$s_n = \sum_1^n a_n.$$ Does that help? $\endgroup$ – John Aug 15 '14 at 20:17

For your first confusion, $a_1 + a_2 + a_3+\cdots$ converges to a limit $L$ is just $\lim_{n\to \infty}s_n = L$ by definition. It does not mean $\lim_{n\to \infty}a_n = L$.

Then to answer the question, $\lim_{n\to \infty}s_n = L$ means $\forall \epsilon >0$, there exists $N$ such that for all $n > N$, we have $|s_n - L |< \epsilon$.


$b_1 = (a_1 + a_2 + \cdots + a_{n_1})$

$b_2 = (a_1 + a_2 + \cdots + a_{n_1}) + (a_{n_1+1} + \cdots + a_{n_2})$ $b_3 = (a_1 + a_2 + \cdots + a_{n_1}) + (a_{n_1+1} + \cdots + a_{n_2}) + (a_{n_2 + 1} + \cdots + a_{n_3}) $

Then you have that $b_k = s_{n_k}$ for some $n_k$ no less than $k$. So if $k>N$, $n_k \geq k >N$, then $|b_k-L| = |s_{n_k}-L| < \epsilon$.

By definition, we have proven $b_k$ converges to $L$


by introducing the sequence $(n_k)_k$ which is an extraction of the sequence $(n)_n$ the proof is easy: now we have $s_{n_k}=(a_1+\ldots+a_{n_1})+\ldots+(a_{n_1+1}+\ldots+a_{n_k})$, as $s_n\to L$ then $s_{n_k}\to L$ ($s_{n_k}$ is extraction of $(s_n)$ ).

  • $\begingroup$ But how do you know that all subsequences of a sequence converge to the same limit as the sequence? $\endgroup$ – Elliot Gorokhovsky Aug 16 '14 at 0:02
  • $\begingroup$ @RenéG I believe this is a well-known theorem. This is proven in theorem 2.5.2 in the book I've mentioned in my question: Subsequences of a convergent sequence converge to the same limit as the original sequence. $\endgroup$ – Hunter Aug 16 '14 at 0:20

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.