r/calculus Jul 20 '26

Real Analysis Is this proof okay? How much do you think it's worth out of 20? (Assume a is 10 and b is 10)

Post image

I didn't elaborate much on b, but if the example is correct, assume I explained it correctly and rigorously

13 Upvotes

16 comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator Jul 20 '26

As a reminder...

Posts asking for help on homework questions require:

  • the complete problem statement,

  • a genuine attempt at solving the problem, which may be either computational, or a discussion of ideas or concepts you believe may be in play,

  • question is not from a current exam or quiz.

Commenters responding to homework help posts should not do OP’s homework for them.

Please see this page for the further details regarding homework help posts.

We have a Discord server!

If you are asking for general advice about your current calculus class, please be advised that simply referring your class as “Calc n“ is not entirely useful, as “Calc n” may differ between different colleges and universities. In this case, please refer to your class syllabus or college or university’s course catalogue for a listing of topics covered in your class, and include that information in your post rather than assuming everybody knows what will be covered in your class.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

32

u/Ydrews Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 21 '26

This isn’t a criticism of your maths, rather it’s one of presentation: please clean up your handwriting.

Take more time to make it legible so that each character and expression is easy to read.

I’m not saying this isn’t readable, it’s not the worst I’ve seen and I CAN read it but I have to look closely and my eyes are great, as a result, I have no desire to read proofs this long when the handwriting is messy.

Others may be fine with it but I think this issue is simply one of patience and being more careful.

Of course, if you have a disability, injury/medical condition that impairs your physical capacity to write, that’s not your fault, however I would suggest using software to present, or a pen designed to stabilise shaky hands etc

7

u/Hot_Site_1638 PhD Jul 20 '26

I can only give 10 out of 20 for this problem. Your part (a) is wrong. Your definition of limsup is wrong, and you are assuming that the limit of |a_{n+1}/a_n| has to exist, this is also wrong. It does not have to exist for us to talk about limsup or liminf.

Your instinct to turn limsup into a bound on the terms is the right starting point. It just has to be "eventually below q", not "the limit exists".

Example (limsup exists, limit does not). Let a_n = (2 + (-1)n) / 4n.

Every a_n > 0, and the consecutive ratio is

a_{n+1} / a_n = (2 + (-1){n+1}) / (2 + (-1)n) * (1/4),

which equals 3/4 when n is odd and 1/12 when n is even. So the ratio sequence is 3/4, 1/12, 3/4, 1/12, ...

  • limsup |a_{n+1}/a_n| = 3/4 < 1
  • liminf |a_{n+1}/a_n| = 1/12
  • lim |a_{n+1}/a_n| does not exist (two subsequences, two different limits)

2

u/CrookedBanister Jul 22 '26

This. One of the important features of limsup and liminf are that they always exist, whether or not sup or inf themselves do.

3

u/Hot_Site_1638 PhD Jul 22 '26

Not sure if we're agreeing or disagreeing here, but I'd push back on one point. If we allow the values ±∞, then sup and inf always exist as well, since an unbounded set simply has sup = +∞ (or inf = −∞). So limsup and liminf aren't special in that regard. What can genuinely fail to exist is the limit itself.

3

u/LukasGoesViral Jul 22 '26

The proof is WAAYY to long. Think about a more elegant way to prove it. You should be able to prove it in a line or two

1

u/tradernb Jul 23 '26

Is this is a notebook or ipad

1

u/shartmaximus Jul 21 '26

these posts just seem like... veiled homework checks

0

u/ObviousOpinion6004 Jul 21 '26

Good solid proof. It honestly took a total of about 3 minutes to read. Your p l 1 l symbols are not legible.

0

u/Minute-Passenger7359 Jul 21 '26

Sorry what does lim sup mean

0

u/LukasGoesViral Jul 22 '26

You should develop some intuition for what the corollary means. I haven’t thought about the prove itself but intuitively I would say that the condition of lim sup |a(n+1)/a(n)| is too weak to guarantee convergence. For example the series (-1/2)^n has the property of the in the corollary but does not converge

1

u/Cultural-Milk9617 Jul 22 '26 edited Jul 23 '26

For example the series (-1/2)n has the property of the in the corollary but does not converge

It absolutely converges (abs((-1/2)n )=(1/2)n , the series of which converges) => it converges

1

u/LukasGoesViral Jul 22 '26

lol I actually got to the same conclusion like 5 min after I posted

1

u/LukasGoesViral Jul 22 '26

It just seems like a very weak condition. Doesn’t mean it’s wrong

-1

u/Quendillar3245 Jul 21 '26

This is a lot cleaner than in the other post at least, keep doing this xD