Prove the alternating sum of a decreasing sequence converging to 0 is Cauchy. Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar ManaraSuppose for all positive integers $n$, $|x_n-y_n|< frac1n$ Prove that $(x_n)$ is also Cauchy.Proof check for completenessProve that $d_n$ is a Cauchy sequence in $mathbbR$Prove $aX_n +bY_n$ is a Cauchy Sequence.Prove a sequence is a Cauchy and thus convergentIf $(x_n)$ and $(y_n)$ are Cauchy sequences, then give a direct argument that $ (x_n + y_n)$ is a Cauchy sequenceIf $x_n$ and $y_n$ are Cauchy then $leftfrac2x_ny_nright$ is CauchyLet $x_n$ be a Cauchy sequence of rational numbers. Define a new sequence $y_n$ by $y_n = (x_n)(x_n+1)$. Show that $y_n$ is a CS.Let $x_n$ be a Cauchy sequence of real numbers, prove that a new sequence $y_n$, with $y_n$=$x_n^frac13$, is also a Cauchy sequence.$x_n rightarrow x$ iff the modified sequence is Cauchy

Where did Arya get these scars?

Retract an already submitted recommendation letter (written for an undergrad student)

What's the difference between using dependency injection with a container and using a service locator?

My admission is revoked after accepting the admission offer

Raising a bilingual kid. When should we introduce the majority language?

What’s with the clanks in Endgame?

Will I lose my paid in full property

All ASCII characters with a given bit count

How to get even lighting when using flash for group photos near wall?

Suing a Police Officer Instead of the Police Department

What to do with someone that cheated their way through university and a PhD program?

Seek and ye shall find

finding a tangent line to a parabola

Implementing 3DES algorithm in Java: is my code secure?

Are these square matrices always diagonalisable?

Rolling Stones Sway guitar solo chord function

Mistake in years of experience in resume?

Additive group of local rings

The art of proof summarizing. Are there known rules, or is it a purely common sense matter?

Expansion//Explosion and Siren Stormtamer

Justification for leaving new position after a short time

Vigenère cipher in Ruby

How to avoid introduction cliches

Is it OK if I do not take the receipt in Germany?



Prove the alternating sum of a decreasing sequence converging to 0 is Cauchy.



Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar ManaraSuppose for all positive integers $n$, $|x_n-y_n|< frac1n$ Prove that $(x_n)$ is also Cauchy.Proof check for completenessProve that $d_n$ is a Cauchy sequence in $mathbbR$Prove $aX_n +bY_n$ is a Cauchy Sequence.Prove a sequence is a Cauchy and thus convergentIf $(x_n)$ and $(y_n)$ are Cauchy sequences, then give a direct argument that $ (x_n + y_n)$ is a Cauchy sequenceIf $x_n$ and $y_n$ are Cauchy then $leftfrac2x_ny_nright$ is CauchyLet $x_n$ be a Cauchy sequence of rational numbers. Define a new sequence $y_n$ by $y_n = (x_n)(x_n+1)$. Show that $y_n$ is a CS.Let $x_n$ be a Cauchy sequence of real numbers, prove that a new sequence $y_n$, with $y_n$=$x_n^frac13$, is also a Cauchy sequence.$x_n rightarrow x$ iff the modified sequence is Cauchy










2












$begingroup$


Let $(x_n)$ be a decreasing sequence with $x_n > 0$ for all $n in mathbbN$, and $(x_n) to 0$. Let $(y_n)$ be defined for all $n in mathbbN$ by
$$y_n = x_0 - x_1 + x_2 - cdots + (-1)^n x_n .$$



I want to show, using the $varepsilon$ definition, that $(y_n)$ is Cauchy.



I am trying to find, given $varepsilon > 0$, a real number $N$ such that for all $m$ and $n$ with $m > n > N$, $|y_m - y_n| < varepsilon$.



I have been going backwards to try and find $N$, and have
beginalign*
|y_m - y_n| & = left| (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m) - (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_n) right| \
|y_m - y_n| & = left| x_n + 1 - x_n + 2 + cdots pm x_m right| \
|y_m - y_n| & leq | x_n + 1 | + | x_n + 2 | + cdots + | x_m | \
|y_m - y_n| & leq ?
endalign*



I do not know how to get a solution from there, and am not sure about the process, particurlary the last step since I feel getting rid of the minuses might prevent me from finding a solution.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Shore
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore is my answer okay?
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    56 mins ago
















2












$begingroup$


Let $(x_n)$ be a decreasing sequence with $x_n > 0$ for all $n in mathbbN$, and $(x_n) to 0$. Let $(y_n)$ be defined for all $n in mathbbN$ by
$$y_n = x_0 - x_1 + x_2 - cdots + (-1)^n x_n .$$



I want to show, using the $varepsilon$ definition, that $(y_n)$ is Cauchy.



I am trying to find, given $varepsilon > 0$, a real number $N$ such that for all $m$ and $n$ with $m > n > N$, $|y_m - y_n| < varepsilon$.



I have been going backwards to try and find $N$, and have
beginalign*
|y_m - y_n| & = left| (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m) - (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_n) right| \
|y_m - y_n| & = left| x_n + 1 - x_n + 2 + cdots pm x_m right| \
|y_m - y_n| & leq | x_n + 1 | + | x_n + 2 | + cdots + | x_m | \
|y_m - y_n| & leq ?
endalign*



I do not know how to get a solution from there, and am not sure about the process, particurlary the last step since I feel getting rid of the minuses might prevent me from finding a solution.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Shore
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore is my answer okay?
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    56 mins ago














2












2








2


1



$begingroup$


Let $(x_n)$ be a decreasing sequence with $x_n > 0$ for all $n in mathbbN$, and $(x_n) to 0$. Let $(y_n)$ be defined for all $n in mathbbN$ by
$$y_n = x_0 - x_1 + x_2 - cdots + (-1)^n x_n .$$



I want to show, using the $varepsilon$ definition, that $(y_n)$ is Cauchy.



I am trying to find, given $varepsilon > 0$, a real number $N$ such that for all $m$ and $n$ with $m > n > N$, $|y_m - y_n| < varepsilon$.



I have been going backwards to try and find $N$, and have
beginalign*
|y_m - y_n| & = left| (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m) - (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_n) right| \
|y_m - y_n| & = left| x_n + 1 - x_n + 2 + cdots pm x_m right| \
|y_m - y_n| & leq | x_n + 1 | + | x_n + 2 | + cdots + | x_m | \
|y_m - y_n| & leq ?
endalign*



I do not know how to get a solution from there, and am not sure about the process, particurlary the last step since I feel getting rid of the minuses might prevent me from finding a solution.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Let $(x_n)$ be a decreasing sequence with $x_n > 0$ for all $n in mathbbN$, and $(x_n) to 0$. Let $(y_n)$ be defined for all $n in mathbbN$ by
$$y_n = x_0 - x_1 + x_2 - cdots + (-1)^n x_n .$$



I want to show, using the $varepsilon$ definition, that $(y_n)$ is Cauchy.



I am trying to find, given $varepsilon > 0$, a real number $N$ such that for all $m$ and $n$ with $m > n > N$, $|y_m - y_n| < varepsilon$.



I have been going backwards to try and find $N$, and have
beginalign*
|y_m - y_n| & = left| (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m) - (x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_n) right| \
|y_m - y_n| & = left| x_n + 1 - x_n + 2 + cdots pm x_m right| \
|y_m - y_n| & leq | x_n + 1 | + | x_n + 2 | + cdots + | x_m | \
|y_m - y_n| & leq ?
endalign*



I do not know how to get a solution from there, and am not sure about the process, particurlary the last step since I feel getting rid of the minuses might prevent me from finding a solution.







real-analysis cauchy-sequences






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 4 hours ago









oranjioranji

616




616







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Shore
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore is my answer okay?
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    56 mins ago













  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Shore
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore is my answer okay?
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    56 mins ago








1




1




$begingroup$
Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
Because the series is alternating and decreasing, I think you can prove by induction on $m$ that $|y_m-y_n| leq |y_n|$.
$endgroup$
– Robert Shore
3 hours ago












$begingroup$
@RobertShore is my answer okay?
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
@RobertShore is my answer okay?
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
3 hours ago












$begingroup$
@RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
$endgroup$
– oranji
56 mins ago





$begingroup$
@RobertShore yes I can definitely show that, but it brings me to the same issue with $|y_m| leq |x_0 - x_1 + cdots pm x_m|$, and I am unsure how to proceed from there.
$endgroup$
– oranji
56 mins ago











2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.



What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:



  • Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$

Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$



Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This is exactly what I was about to do.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    55 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
    $endgroup$
    – trancelocation
    54 mins ago


















2












$begingroup$

This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".



We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$



$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.



$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$



$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.



$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.



Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.



Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.



Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    59 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    I'll edit this answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    56 mins ago











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3201256%2fprove-the-alternating-sum-of-a-decreasing-sequence-converging-to-0-is-cauchy%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









2












$begingroup$

To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.



What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:



  • Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$

Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$



Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This is exactly what I was about to do.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    55 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
    $endgroup$
    – trancelocation
    54 mins ago















2












$begingroup$

To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.



What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:



  • Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$

Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$



Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This is exactly what I was about to do.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    55 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
    $endgroup$
    – trancelocation
    54 mins ago













2












2








2





$begingroup$

To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.



What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:



  • Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$

Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$



Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



To see that the sequence of partial sums is Cauchy, you cannot use the triangle inequality directly as you did. A famous counter example here is $sum_k=1^inftyfrac(-1)^kk$.



What you can do is grouping the terms of the partial sums $s_n= sum_j=1^n(-1)^jx_j$ as follows:



  • Let $m = n+k, k,n in mathbbN$

Now, you can write $|s_m - s_n|$ in two different ways:



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-x_n+2i+1)| & k = 2i+1 \
|x_n+1 - (x_n+2-x_n+3) - cdots - (x_n+2i-2-x_n+2i-1) - x_2i| & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



$$|s_n+k - s_n| = begincases
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) + x_n+2i+1| & k = 2i+1 \
|(x_n+1 - x_n+2) + cdots + (x_n+2i-1-x_n+2i) | & k = 2i \
endcases
$$



Using the fact that $x_n searrow 0$, it follows immediately that for all $k in mathbbN$ holds
$$|s_n+k - s_n| leq x_n+1$$



Hence, for $epsilon > 0$ choose $N_epsilon$ such that $x_N_epsilon < epsilon$. Then, for all $m> n > N_epsilon$ you have
$$|s_m - s_n| leq x_n+1 leq x_N_epsilon < epsilon$$







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 39 mins ago

























answered 56 mins ago









trancelocationtrancelocation

14.6k1929




14.6k1929











  • $begingroup$
    This is exactly what I was about to do.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    55 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
    $endgroup$
    – trancelocation
    54 mins ago
















  • $begingroup$
    This is exactly what I was about to do.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    55 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
    $endgroup$
    – trancelocation
    54 mins ago















$begingroup$
This is exactly what I was about to do.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
55 mins ago




$begingroup$
This is exactly what I was about to do.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
55 mins ago




1




1




$begingroup$
@SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
$endgroup$
– trancelocation
54 mins ago




$begingroup$
@SubhasisBiswas So, I did it for you :-D
$endgroup$
– trancelocation
54 mins ago











2












$begingroup$

This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".



We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$



$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.



$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$



$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.



$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.



Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.



Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.



Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    59 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    I'll edit this answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    56 mins ago















2












$begingroup$

This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".



We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$



$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.



$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$



$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.



$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.



Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.



Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.



Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    59 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    I'll edit this answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    56 mins ago













2












2








2





$begingroup$

This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".



We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$



$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.



$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$



$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.



$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.



Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.



Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.



Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



This is also known as the "Leibnitz's Test".



We write $s_n = x_1-x_2+x_3-...+(-1)^n+1x_n$



$s_2n+2-s_2n=u_2n+1-u_2n+2 geq0$ for all $n$.



$s_2n+1-s_2n-1=-u_2n+u_2n+1 leq 0$



$s_2n =u_1 -(u_2-u_3)-(u_4-u_5)...-u_2n leq u_1$, i.e. a monotone increasing sequence bounded above.



$s_2n+1 =(u_1 -u_2)+(u_3-u_4)+...+u_2n+1 geq u_1-u_2$, i.e. a monotone decreasing sequence bounded below.



Hence, both are convergent subsequences of $(s_n)$. But, we have $lim (s_2n+1-s_2n)=u_2n+1=0$, therefore, they converge to the same limit.



Hence, $(s_n)$ converges, i.e. it is Cauchy.



Note: We conclude that $(s_n)$ converges because the indices of the two subsequences $(s_2n)$ and $(s_2n+1)$ i.e. $U = 2n+1 : n in mathbbN$ and $V = 2n : n in mathbbN$ form a partition of $mathbbN$ and they both converge to the same limit.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered 3 hours ago









Subhasis BiswasSubhasis Biswas

608512




608512











  • $begingroup$
    I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    59 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    I'll edit this answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    56 mins ago
















  • $begingroup$
    I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
    $endgroup$
    – oranji
    59 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    I'll edit this answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Subhasis Biswas
    56 mins ago















$begingroup$
I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
$endgroup$
– oranji
59 mins ago




$begingroup$
I want to use the $varepsilon$ definition of a Cauchy sequence, and not the fact that all convergent sequences are Cauchy, which is why I cannot use this solution.
$endgroup$
– oranji
59 mins ago












$begingroup$
I'll edit this answer.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
56 mins ago




$begingroup$
I'll edit this answer.
$endgroup$
– Subhasis Biswas
56 mins ago

















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3201256%2fprove-the-alternating-sum-of-a-decreasing-sequence-converging-to-0-is-cauchy%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Are there any AGPL-style licences that require source code modifications to be public? Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Force derivative works to be publicAre there any GPL like licenses for Apple App Store?Do you violate the GPL if you provide source code that cannot be compiled?GPL - is it distribution to use libraries in an appliance loaned to customers?Distributing App for free which uses GPL'ed codeModifications of server software under GPL, with web/CLI interfaceDoes using an AGPLv3-licensed library prevent me from dual-licensing my own source code?Can I publish only select code under GPLv3 from a private project?Is there published precedent regarding the scope of covered work that uses AGPL software?If MIT licensed code links to GPL licensed code what should be the license of the resulting binary program?If I use a public API endpoint that has its source code licensed under AGPL in my app, do I need to disclose my source?

2013 GY136 Descoberta | Órbita | Referências Menu de navegação«List Of Centaurs and Scattered-Disk Objects»«List of Known Trans-Neptunian Objects»

Metrô de Los Teques Índice Linhas | Estações | Ver também | Referências Ligações externas | Menu de navegação«INSTITUCIÓN»«Mapa de rutas»originalMetrô de Los TequesC.A. Metro Los Teques |Alcaldía de Guaicaipuro – Sitio OficialGobernacion de Mirandaeeeeeee