Consider the sequence a 1 , a 2 , … where a n = cos ( π n 2 + n ) . Find n → ∞ lim a n .
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
Note that it is not always true that
n → ∞ lim f ( g ( n ) ) = f ( n → ∞ lim g ( n ) )
More justification needs to be provided.
Nice solution :)
Log in to reply
Thanks. Nice problem: I almost quickly chose "does not exist" before I gave it a second thought. :)
Log in to reply
I have 1 step solution for this :)
Yes sir, this problem is tricky :D... Many would choose limit doesn't exists.
This might be a really stupid question, but why is n → ∞ lim n 2 + n = n as n 2 + n = n ∗ 1 + n 1 and ( 1 + n 1 ) → 0 if n → ∞ .
What am I missing here?
Log in to reply
The Taylor series for ( 1 + x ) α is 1 + α x + O ( x 2 ) , so
1 + n 1 = ( 1 + n 1 ) 2 1 = 1 + 2 n 1 + O ( n 2 1 ) .
When we multiply this by n we have an expression of the form
n + 2 1 + O ( n 1 ) ,
which goes to n + 2 1 as n → ∞ .
Log in to reply
I think I got it. The idea is to not evaluate the limit, but express it in terms of n .
Very nice!
Nice one. :) Now consider this:
n 2 + n = n 1 + n 1 .
By the same horribly faulty reasoning you obtain that the limit in question doesn't exist.
but why can't we consider this as n->inf , n^2>>>n hence cos(pi*root(n^2+n)= cos(npi)=hence, +/- 1 !
Log in to reply
It is tempting to ignore the n term as n → ∞ , but it does make a big difference when we take the square root and then multiply by π . To look at a concrete example, consider n = 1 0 0 0 . If we ignore the n term then we have 1 0 0 0 2 = 1 0 0 0 , and cos ( 1 0 0 0 ∗ π ) = 1 . But including the n term gives us 1 0 0 0 2 + 1 0 0 0 = 1 0 0 0 . 4 9 9 8 7 5 . . . . , and cos ( 1 0 0 0 . 4 9 9 8 7 5 π ) = 0 . 0 0 0 3 9 2 7 , , ,
Since n 2 + n = ( n + 2 1 ) 2 − 4 1 , we have that n 2 + n goes to n + 2 1 as n → ∞ , and this extra 2 1 term makes all the difference when multiplying by π .
Log in to reply
Thanks I think i got the concept . But i still remember getting all similar limit correctly by this method even in my university class. But i think the trig function make the whole difference !! Thanks for Siting an example, that was much self explanatory !! Brian
We can do it .. also By this way Y = cos (π√n² + n) dy/dn = –sin(π√n² + n)× [(π/√n² + n)×2n + 1 Now put n= ∞ You get ∞ × 0 = [0] Ans.
Note that it is not always true that
n → ∞ lim f ( g ( n ) ) = f ( n → ∞ lim g ( n ) )
More justification needs to be provided.
Isn't this true if n is natural? if n is a real number then pi*(n+0.5) is not necessary a value in which cos function is zero.
Log in to reply
Yes. Note that the series a n is indexed by integers, and so the limit is taken over the integers.
Log in to reply
Yes, I was blind. Now I see that the oblique asymptote at +inf is n+0.5. It was easy but if your not careful you say it DOES NOT EXIST.
Ok,so here is the shorter solution
First, take n 2 common from the root
n → ∞ lim c o s ( π n ( 1 + n 1 ) 2 1 )
Now, I use this property the most
( 1 + x ) n = 1 + n x , x ≪ 1
Here
n → ∞ lim c o s ( π n ( 1 + 2 n 1 ) ) = n → ∞ lim s i n ( n π )
Since n is an integer n → ∞ lim s i n ( n π ) = 0 .
Short but sweet. :)
A good solution but my way was a bit irrational or wrong too.(Cause I do not have a deep knowledge on limits)
That's Bernoulli's Inequality
This proof does not rely on unexplained exchanges of limites. First examine the argument:
π n 2 + n = π ( n 2 + n − n ) + n π 3. Binomi = π n 2 + n + n n 2 + n − n 2 + n π = π 1 + n − 2 + 1 1 + n π ∣ ∣ ∣ first part → 2 π = π ( 1 + n − 2 + 1 1 − 2 1 ) + ( n + 2 1 ) π = : c n + 2 2 n + 1 π , ∣ c n ∣ → 0 for n → ∞
Use that to gain an upper estimate of the given sequence:
0 ≤ ∣ a n ∣ ⇒ a n = ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ cos ( 2 2 n + 1 π + c n ) ∣ ∣ ∣ ∣ = ∣ ∣ ∣ ( − 1 ) n cos ( 2 π + c n ) ∣ ∣ ∣ = ∣ − sin ( c n ) ∣ = sin ∣ c n ∣ → 0 → 0
Rem.: In the last step, we use that sin ( x ) is continuous in x = 0 so that we can be sure the following limit exists:
x → 0 lim sin ( x ) = 0
Believe it or not I just used the squeeze theorem on this problem, and i got it right...
Without knowing exactly what you did, I am unable to comment about the validity of your solution.
Without knowing exactly what you did, I am unable to comment about the validity of your solution. There are many ways to use the squeeze theorem, and some of them need not lead to a completely rigorous solution.
At first attempt, I got it doesn't exist. Then, unsatisfied by the comments, I went to Wolfram Alfa and tried to computer the limit. The computer said it lies between -1 and 1. It's true right. I also checked other limit calculators and they gave same answer. May be the answer is wrong.
Log in to reply
Did you take the limit over the reals, or over the integers?
If you took it over the reals, then the limit does not exist, since we "essentially" still have a cosine graph.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Note first that
n 2 + n = ( n + 2 1 ) 2 − 4 1 = 2 2 n + 1 1 − ( 2 n + 1 ) 2 1 =
( n + 2 1 ) 1 − ( 2 n + 1 ) 2 1 .
In the limit as n → ∞ this expression goes to ( n + 2 1 ) , and so
lim n → ∞ cos ( π n 2 + n ) = cos ( π ∗ ( lim n → ∞ n 2 + n ) ) =
lim n → ∞ cos ( π ∗ ( n + 2 1 ) ) = 0
since for any integer n we have cos ( π ( n + 2 1 ) ) = 0 .