Understanding sequences as functions from natural numbers to real numbers
A sequence is a function . We denote the sequence by where , written as:
Natural numbers representing term indices
Each term is a real number
A sequence is fundamentally a function with ordered domain
The rigorous definition of sequences emerged in the 19th century through the work of Augustin-Louis Cauchy (1789-1857) and Karl Weierstrass (1815-1897), who sought to place calculus on firm logical foundations.
| Sequence | Expression | Behavior | Classification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Converges to 0 | Convergent | ||
| Oscillates between -1 and 1 | Divergent (bounded) | ||
| Tends to +∞ | Divergent (unbounded) | ||
| Converges to 1 | Convergent |
Consider the recursive sequence defined by and . This is Newton's method for finding .
Step 1:
Step 2:
Step 3:
Converges rapidly to
The precise mathematical formulation of sequence convergence
Let be a sequence and . We say the sequence converges to if:
We write or as .
| Symbol | Meaning | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| For every positive ε | No matter how small the tolerance | |
| There exists a natural number N | We can find a threshold | |
| For all n greater than N | From term N+1 onward | |
| Distance less than ε | Terms stay within ε of a |
For any horizontal band of width centered at , all but finitely many terms of the sequence lie within this band. Imagine drawing a strip of height around the limit line—eventually, all sequence points must stay inside this strip, no matter how narrow we make it.
The ε-neighborhood of is the open interval:
This formulation emphasizes that "being close to " means "lying in every neighborhood of ".
if and only if for every , only finitely many terms of lie outside .
(1.2) ⟹ (1.4): If all terms from onward lie in , then at most the first terms lie outside, which is finite.
(1.4) ⟹ (1.2): If only finitely many terms lie outside , say , take . Then for , we have .
(the sequence does NOT converge to ) if and only if:
This is the logical negation of the ε-N definition. It says: there exists a "bad" ε₀ such that infinitely many terms escape the ε₀-neighborhood.
A sequence is divergent if it does not converge to any real number:
Oscillates between -1 and 1
Bounded but irregular oscillation
Unbounded, tends to +∞
Unbounded, oscillates
"Divergent" and "unbounded" are independent concepts. A divergent sequence can be bounded (like ), and an unbounded sequence is necessarily divergent.
for .
Given , we need , which means .
Take .
Then for : .
for .
Given , we need .
Taking logarithms: . Since , we get .
Take .
Prove:
Solution:
First, compute the difference:
For large :
Given , take . Then for , the expression is less than .
Prove:
Proof:
Choose . Consider the subsequence (even terms).
For :
For any , we can choose such that . Then .
If for all , then .
Given any , for all :
We can take . The condition is satisfied trivially for all .
If , then for any fixed .
Given , since , such that .
For the shifted sequence, if , then , so .
Thus the same works for the shifted sequence.
Prove:
Solution:
Rationalize the numerator:
Since , we have:
Given , take .
For : .
Prove:
Solution:
Note that:
Each factor , and , so:
By the Squeeze theorem (covered in CALC-2.3), the limit is 0.
When proving using the ε-N definition:
Divide numerator and denominator by the highest power of , then use .
If one factor is bounded and the other tends to zero, the product tends to zero.
Rationalize by multiplying by the conjugate. This often simplifies the expression.
Find a specific and show infinitely many terms escape the -neighborhood.
A sequence is:
Every convergent sequence is bounded.
Let . Take . Then such that for :
The first terms form a finite set.
Let .
Then for all .
The converse is FALSE: bounded does NOT imply convergent. The sequence is bounded ( for all ) but diverges because it oscillates between -1 and 1.
Show: is bounded but divergent.
Bounded: for all .
Divergent: The sequence does not converge because takes values dense in (since is irrational, is dense in ).
Convergent ⟹ Bounded (always true)
Bounded ⟹ Convergent (FALSE in general)
Bounded + Monotone ⟹ Convergent (Monotone Bounded Theorem, CALC-2.3)
Practice proving limits using the ε-N definition
Prove directly from the ε-N definition.
Prove .
For and , find the smallest valid N.
Problem: Prove for .
Proof:
Given . Since , we can write where .
By Bernoulli's inequality: .
Choose . For :
Problem: Prove for .
Proof:
Let . Since , we have .
Then . By binomial theorem:
So .
Given , choose . For :
Problem: Find .
Solution:
Since , we have:
Both and .
By Squeeze Theorem: .
If and , then:
Given . Since , such that for .
Since , such that for .
Let . For :
Mistake 1: Using N that depends on n. The value N must be a fixed number.
Mistake 2: Claiming without specifying for which n.
Correct: Always state "for all " after specifying N.
Problem: Prove .
Solution:
Rationalize:
Since :
By Squeeze Theorem, .
Every sequence has a monotone subsequence (increasing or decreasing).
Problem: Prove .
Solution:
Given , choose .
For : . ∎
If , then:
Note: The converse is false. Example: has arithmetic mean converging to 0.
Problem: If , find .
Solution:
Since , by Cesàro mean theorem:
Direct calculation: where .
Polynomial/Polynomial
Exponential Form
Before the ε-N definition, mathematicians used vague terms like 'approaches' or 'gets arbitrarily close.' This led to paradoxes and incorrect proofs. The ε-N definition provides a rigorous framework that eliminates ambiguity and allows us to prove statements about limits with certainty.
Think of ε as a 'tolerance level' - how close we want the sequence to be to the limit. N is the 'starting point' after which all terms are within this tolerance. The definition says: no matter how tight we make the tolerance (ε), we can always find a point (N) after which all terms satisfy it.
Yes! For smaller values of ε, we typically need a larger N. For example, for the sequence 1/n → 0, if ε = 0.1, we need N = 10. If ε = 0.01, we need N = 100. The key is that such an N must exist for ANY positive ε.
No! One of the fundamental theorems (which we prove in CALC-2.2) shows that if a sequence converges, its limit is unique. This is why we can write 'the limit' instead of 'a limit.'
Convergent implies bounded, but the converse is false. The sequence {(-1)^n} is bounded (all terms are between -1 and 1) but divergent because it oscillates forever. However, every convergent sequence must be bounded.
Work backwards: start with |xₙ - a| < ε and algebraically solve for what condition on n makes this true. The resulting expression tells you how to choose N. Common techniques include using floor functions or adding 1 to ensure N is a natural number.