SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS FOR PROBLEM SET 3

FALL 2010, MATH 311:01

1.1.1. Show that [0, 1] is a neighborhood of 2 that is, there is > 0 such that 3 2 2 , + 3 3 Proof. We set = 1/3, and observe that 2 2 , + 3 3 = 1 ,1 3 [0, 1]. [0, 1].

1.1.5. Give an example of a sequence that is bounded but not convergent. Proof. For each n N, we set an = (1)n . Then, the sequence (an ) is entirely contained in n=1 [1, 1], hence bounded. Setting = 1/2, however, there is no real number A such that |an A| < for all suciently large n. To see this, we note that 1 and -1 cannot both be in (A 1/2, A + 1/2) for any A R. Then, for any N , there exists an n > N such that |an A| : if -1 is in (A 1/2, A + 1/2), we pick n = 2N ; if 1 is in (A 1/2, A + 1/2), we pick n = 2N + 1. This proves that (an ) does not converge. n=1 1.1.6b. Use the denition of convergence to prove that each of the following sequences converges: 2 2n n

.
n=1

Proof. We claim that the above sequence converges to -2. We rst note that 2 2n 2 2n + 2n 2 (2) = = n n n for any n N. Fix > 0, and invoke the archimedean principle to pick an integer N > 2/. We now observe that any n > N yields 2 2n 2 2 (2) = < < , n n N whence the above sequence converges to -2 as claimed. 1.2.17. Prove that the sequence 2n + 1 n

is Cauchy.
n=1

Proof. We claim that the above sequence converges to 2. We rst note that 2n + 1 2n + 1 2n 1 2 = = n n n
1

FALL 2010, MATH 311:01

for any n N. Fix > 0, and invoke the archimedean principle to pick an integer N > 1/. We now observe that any n > N yields 2n + 1 1 1 2 = < < , n n N whence the above sequence converges to as claimed. Recalling that every convergent sequence in R is Cauchy, we conclude that the above sequence is Cauchy. Remark. The equivalence of Cauchy sequences and convergent sequences is a manifestation of the completeness of the eld R of real numbers. In mathematical analysis, we typically construct R from the eld Q of rational numbers via Dedekind cuts or Cauchy completion: the Dedekind-cut approach lls in the supremums of bounded-above sets, whereas the Cauchy-completion approach lls in the limits of Cauchy sequences. 1.2.18. Give an example of a set with exactly two accumulation points. Proof. For each n N, we dene Kn = {n + 1/m : m N}. For example, K5 = 1 1 1 5 + 1, 5 + , 5 + , 5 + , 2 3 4 .

We claim that each Kn has precisely one accumulation point, namely n, and
N

Kn
n=1

has N accumulation points: 1, 2, . . . , N . An immediate consequence is that

Kn
n=1

has countably many accumulation points. Fix n N. For any > 0, we may nd an integer M > 1/, so that every m > M implies 1/m < . This, in particular, implies that n + 1/m is in (n , n + ). Since was arbitrary, every neighborhood of n contains innitely many points of Kn ; in fact, it contains all but nitely many points of Kn . It follows that n is an accumulation point of Kn . If n is any real number distinct from n, then we may pick 0 < 0 < |n n |/2, and examine the open interval (n 0 , n + 0 ). Since the open interval (n 0 , n + 0 ), disjoint from (n 0 , n + 0 ), contains all but nitely many points of Kn , the open interval (n 0 , n + 0 ) about n cannot contain innitely many points of Kn . It follows that n is not an accumulation point of Kn , whence we conclude that n is the only accumulation point of Kn . By similar reasoning, we can show that the accumulation points of
N

Kn
n=1

are 1, 2, . . . , N ; in fact, reproducing the above proof N times would suce. It follows, in particular, that K1 K2 is an example of a set with exactly two accumulation points.

SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS FOR PROBLEM SET 3

Remark. Innitely many and all but nitely many are dierentthis is an important distinction to make. Any neighborhood of the limit of a sequence contains all but nitely many terms; any neighborhood of an accumulation point of a set contains innitely many points. 1.2.22. Let S be a nonempty set of real numbers that is bounded from above (below) and let x = sup S (inf S). Prove that either x belongs to S or x is an accumulation point of S. Proof. We argue by contraposition. Suppose that x is neither a point of x nor an accumulation point of a bounded-above set S. We show that x cannot be a supremum of S. Indeed, we may nd an > 0 such that (x , x + ) does not intersect S, whence x does not belong to S. We may suppose that x is an upper bound of S without loss of generality, since no real number can be a supremum of a set without being an upper bound of the set. We now show that x is an upper bound of S, whence x cannot be a supremum of S. We rst note that each s S satises s x. Since (x , x + ) does not intersect S, we are forced to conclude that x x . Therefore, x is an upper bound, as desired. We have thus shown that x is neither a point of x nor an accumulation point of S, from which the desired result follows. The case for x = inf S is similar. Remark. Therefore, x belongs to the closure of S, which is the collection of the points in S and the accumulation points of S. As we shall see later, the closure of any subset of R is closed. 1.3.25. Suppose (an ) and (bn ) are sequences such that (an ) and (an + bn ) converge. n=1 n=1 n=1 n=1 Prove that (bn ) converges. n=1 Proof. Let A be the limit of (an ) , and C the limit of (an + bn ) . Fix > 0, and nd integers n=1 n=1 N1 and N2 such that n1 > N1 and n2 > N2 imply |an1 A| < and |(an2 + bn2 ) C| < , 2 2 respectively. Set N = max{N1 , N2 }, so that each n > N implies |an A| < and |(an + bn ) C| < . 2 2 Then, an application of the triangle inequality yields |bn (A C)| = |((an + bn ) C) (an A)| |(an + bn ) C| + |an A| < + = 2 2 for all n > N , whence (bn ) converges to A C. n=1 1.3.26. Give an example in which (an ) and (bn ) do not converge but (an +bn ) converges. n=1 n=1 n=1 Proof. For each n N, we set an = (1)n , and bn = (1)(1)n = (1)n+1 . We have shown in Exercise 1.1.5 that neither (an ) nor (bn ) converges. Now, an + bn = 0 for all n N, whence n=1 n=1 (an + bn ) clearly converges to 0. n=1 1.3.32b. Find the limit of the sequence with the general term as given: cos n n Proof. We have proved in Exercise 1.2.18 that the sequence (1/n) converges to 0. We know n=1 that | cos n| 1 for all n N, whence it follows from Theorem 1.13 that the sequence converges to 0.