It is well known that the sequence ( 1 + n 1 ) n approaches e from below, and the sequence ( 1 + n 1 ) n + 1 approaches e from above. Hence, for each n , there is a unique value a n between 0 and 1 such that ( 1 + n 1 ) n + a n = e .
Determine 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.
well-written!
Nice!
good
excelent.........
thats great !
Neat solution
very simple and neat solution
very simple soln
brilliant :D
So simple
Rearranging ( 1 + n 1 ) n + a n = e and taking limits gives n → ∞ lim a n = n → ∞ lim ( lo g ( 1 + n 1 ) 1 − n lo g ( 1 + n 1 ) )
Using the Maclaurin series lo g ( 1 + x ) = r = 1 ∑ ∞ r ( − 1 ) r + 1 x r it is easy to see the limit tends to 2 1
We have lim n → ∞ ( 1 + n 1 ) n + a n = e
Taking the lo g of both sides, we obtain lim n → ∞ ( n + a n ) lo g ( 1 + n 1 ) = 1
Note that the power series for − lo g ( 1 − x ) is ∑ k = 1 ∞ k x k for ∣ x ∣ < 1 . Therefore:
n → ∞ lim ( n + a n ) ( n − 1 − 2 1 n − 2 + 3 1 n − 3 + O ( n − 4 ) ) n → ∞ lim ( n + a n ) ( n − 1 − 2 1 n − 2 ) n → ∞ lim − 2 1 n − 1 + a n n − 1 − 2 1 a n n − 2 n → ∞ lim a n n − 1 a n = 1 = 1 = 0 = 2 1 n − 1 = 2 1
EDIT: attempt at fixing massive error in the proof:
Due to the power series of lo g ( 1 − x ) , we see that as n gets arbitrarily large, lo g ( 1 + n − 1 ) gets arbitrarily close to n − 1 − 2 1 n − 2 . Let a n ′ be the solution to ( n + a n ′ ) ( n − 1 − 2 1 n 2 ) = 1 . Then a n ′ = n 1 − 2 n 2 1 1 − n = n 1 − 2 n 2 1 1 − ( 1 − 2 1 n − 1 ) = 2 1 1 − 2 1 n − 1 1
Note that a n = lo g ( 1 − n − 1 ) 1 − n , so a n ≈ a n ′ for arbitrarily large values of n
Since lim n → ∞ a n ′ = lim n → ∞ 2 1 1 − 2 1 n − 1 1 and lim n → ∞ a n = a n ′ , n → ∞ lim a n = 2 1
The second last equation isn't exactly correct. The LHS is a number (if it exists) and the RHS is a variable.
From your working, it need not be true that lim a n = 2 1 . For example, we could have a n = 3 1 (or any other constant), and it will still satisfy the third last equation, namely
lim − 2 1 n − 1 + a n n − 1 − 2 1 a n n − 2 = 0 .
You cannot simply 'cancel' when taking limits, especially since the limit is 0 and you are dividing by larger and larger numbers.
Log in to reply
Oh my goodness I can't believe I did that. I was really eager to reuse the proof that ( 1 + n − 1 ) n + k approaches e fastest when k = 2 1
This proof is mathematically nt correct. you can't use limit and big O at the same equation on the same variable. what Chung Gene Keun said is another fallacy.
Log in to reply
Thanks for the feedback, but actually I'm reasonably certain big O can be used in limits, unless you can prove me otherwise (please do, I prefer to know when I'm wrong).
However, I did realize that this was stupid reasoning, you can see my reply to Chung Keun.
Log in to reply
Thanks for the feedback, but actually I'm reasonably certain big O can be used in limits, unless you can prove me otherwise (please do, I prefer to know when I'm wrong).
They can, in a way. This is really a moot question anyhow: all six uses of " lim n → ∞ " need to be removed. Other than that, the main change to make is: don't suddenly drop the Big-O notation, it's the key to your solution.
there is only one value between 0 & 1, that is 1/2 So, the solution is 1/2
The sequence
0
,
1
,
0
,
1
,
0
,
1
,
…
does not have a limit.
The sequence
2
1
,
3
1
,
4
1
,
…
tends to 0.
Why can't either of these work?
consider a(n) = (-1)^n.(1/3) ... this will also work but dosent converge... consider a(n) = (-1)^n (1/3)^n ... this will also work but converges to 0 so i think answer should be " does not exist'.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
We have been given that ( 1 + n 1 ) n + a n = e .
My first attempt is to solve for for a n .
Taking l n on both sides,
( n + a n ) ∗ l n ( 1 + n 1 ) = 1
So, ( n + a n ) = l n ( 1 + n 1 ) 1
Thus , a n = l n ( 1 + n 1 ) 1 − n
We have to find lim n → ∞ a n = ?
i.e we will have to find
lim n → ∞ l n ( 1 + n 1 ) 1 − n
We can treat it as a whole new problem. I prefer to change variable from n → ∞ to x → 0 by putting x = n 1
lim x → 0 + l n ( 1 + x ) 1 − x 1
= lim x → 0 + x ∗ l n ( 1 + x ) x − l n ( 1 + x )
Applying l'Hopital's rule ( i.e. differentiate the numerator and denominator w.r.t x ) as the expression is of the form 0 0 ,
lim x → 0 + l n ( 1 + x ) + 1 + x x 1 − 1 + x 1
= lim x → 0 + ( 1 + x ) ∗ ( l n ( 1 + x ) + x 1 + x − 1
= lim x → 0 + ( 1 + x ) ∗ ( l n ( 1 + x ) + x x
Again we see that at x = 0 the expression is indeterminate ( 0 0 ) .
On second application of l'Hopital's rule ,
lim x → 0 + 1 + x 1 + l n ( 1 + x ) + 1 + x x + 1 1
This expression at x = 0 gives value : 1 + 0 + 0 + 1 1 = 2 1 .
Therefore we get lim n → ∞ a n = 2 1