1. If x∈R and there is a Cauchy sequence (an) in Q such that x=LIMan, then show that x=liman.
2. For any a∈R, prove that liman/n!=0.
3. Let A={q∈Q:q2<3}, let x=sup(A), prove that x2=3.
4. Let s1=1, and sn+1=1+sn. Assume that sn converges to c, show that c=(5+1)/2.
5. Let (an) be a bounded sequence in R, and A=limsup(an), show that for any ϵ>0, the set {n∈N∣A−ϵ≤an≤A+ϵ} is infinite.
Solution
1. Suffice to show that, for any ϵ>0, there is an N, such that for all n>N, we have
∣an−x∣≤ϵ,
which is
x−ϵ≤an≤x+ϵ.
By Cauchy condition for an, take ϵ1=ϵ, there exists N1>0, such that for all n,m>N1, we have ∣an−am∣<ϵ1, in particular, we have
am−ϵ≤an≤am+ϵ.
Consider the sequence (am)m=N1∞, then we have its formal limit satisfies, for all n>N1,
x−ϵ=(LIMam)−ϵ≤an≤(LIMam)+ϵ=x+ϵ.
Finally, take N=N1.
2. Take any N>2∣a∣, then for any n>N, we have
∣an/an−1∣=∣a∣/n<1/2
Hence ∣an∣≤∣aN∣(1/2)n−N, take limit n→∞ shows the result.
3. Since A is bounded above, we know the x=sup(A) exists. Suppose x2<3, then by the same argument as in Prop 5.5.12, we have a small enough ϵ>0, such that (x+ϵ)2<3, then let q be a rational number, such that x<q<x+ϵ, we have q2<3, hence q∈A. This contradicts with with x being the sup of A. Suppose x2>3, then we can find small enough ϵ>0, such that (x−ϵ)2>3, in particular x−ϵ is also an upperbound of A, hence contradict with x being the upper bound, hence x2=3.
4. Since sn+12=1+sn, and (sn) converges, hence
limsn+12=lim(1+sn)
which gives
c2=1+c
solving this gives $c = (\pm \sqrt{5}+1)/2 . Since sn are all positive by induction and, we see c=(5+1)/2
5. This is covered in last Friday's lecture, where we proved that L=limsup(an) is a limit point of an. Here we give the proof again.
We prove by contradiction, suppose there is an ϵ>0, such that there are only finitely many terms in (an) contained in [L−ϵ,L+ϵ]. Then there exists an N1, such that for all n>N1, ∣an−L∣>ϵ. By property of limsup, we know there also exists N2, such that for all n>N2, an<L+ϵ. Then, for n>N=max(N1,N2), we have
∣an−L∣>ϵ,an<L+ϵ⇒an<L−ϵ.
Taking limsup on the left, we get L \leq L - \epsilon$, which is a contradiction.
math104-f21/hw4.txt · Last modified: 2022/01/11 08:36 by pzhou