calculus. did i do this right?
\[\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}(-1)^{n-1}\frac{ \ln(n) }{ n }\]=
=\[\frac{ d }{ dx }\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}\frac{ \frac{ 1 }{ n } }{ n }*\frac{ n }{ n }=\frac{ 1 }{ n^2 }\]
then by the p series 2>1 so the series is convergent?
i always screw up the ln stuff. just cant seem to get it down
you are taking the derivative of top and bottom, as I see? but isn't (-1)^(n-1) also on the top ? the top is not just infinity, it is going from negative to positive infinity depending on whether n-1 is even or odd.
oh yes... so how should i have done it with this then?
if i do the alternating series test... how is ln (n+1) less than ln (n)?
i didnt mean to say "how is" i just mean "is"
this is what wolf got
not much, hah ?
were you trying to use alternating test and then use losptial to find the limit of ln(n)/n as n approaches infinity ?
nope. they didnt tell us anything. i do know the answer is convergent. I just dont know how to get there properly
freckles! yes, that is what i was attempting
\[\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}\frac{\ln(n)}{n}=\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}\frac{(\ln(n))'}{(n)'}=?\]
after you show that approaches 0 you need to show ln(n)/n is decreasing if possible
i thought it was \[\frac{ \frac{ 1 }{ n } }{ n }\] but then i realized i didnt take the bottom properly and now i think its just \[\frac{ 1 }{ n }\]. which is divergent by the harmonic series but convergent by the Alt Ser Test, i think
I am not sure if ln(n+1) is less than ln(n)
i want to say yes it is, but the ln's always mess me up in my head
\[a\gt b \implies \ln(a) \gt \ln(b)\]
http://tutorial.math.lamar.edu/Classes/CalcII/AlternatingSeries.aspx I'm going by this site we have the first thing we need now we need to see if we have the second thing: \[\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}\frac{\ln(n)}{n}=\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}\frac{1}{n}=0\] we need to see if : \[\frac{\ln(n)}{n} > \frac{\ln(n+1)}{n+1} \text{ for all } n>0\]
on my calc, it says that ln(1)=0 and ln(2) = .693147..
calculator*
that is true since a>b implies lna>lnb :)
hi X! what do you mean by that ? is this a rule i dont know about?
hey there :) no i was just clarifying when you said ln1=0 and ln2=0.6 i said in general a>b gives lna>lnb this is always true
why don't we do the integral here?
it is the alternating series test
i need to prove that a_n > a_n+1 but i dont see it..im doing something wrong
if you feel the integral will work, id be happy to try it with you
i hate that one the most tho lol
@xapproachesinfinity . after applying the integral test, that just ends with 1/n, right? and by theory, that is 0= convergent. is this all i need?
you may use first derivative to prove lnx/x is decreasing for x > e
f(x) = lnx/x f'(x) = (1-lnx)/x^2 < 0 for all x > e
@ganeshie8 becaue e=1 right?
do you mean ln e = 1 ?
yes, sorry
hmm now that i think about integral test may not be your way out i was just throwing ideas lol
im taking any suggestion, dont apologize. Its appreciated
hmm so lnx/x > ln(x+1)/x+1 for x>e
ok, so let me sum this up\[\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}(-1)^{n-1}\frac{ \ln(n) }{ n }\rightarrow \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty}\frac{ \ln(n)' }{ n' }= \frac{ 1 }{ n }\] which is zero and then \[a_n >a_n+1 \] because ln(1)<lne......?
then these two factors meet the requirements of the alternating series test for convergence?
hold up what exactly is your goal here ?
to prove A) that the lim n>infinty= zero and that a_n > a_n+1
you had some feeling that the given infinite sum converges to some number as it might satisfy the requirements of alternating series test
You need to prove 3 things to conclude the series covnerges using alternating series test : 1) \(\frac{\ln n}{n}\ge 0\) for all \(n\) 2) \(\lim\limits_{n\to \infty}\frac{\ln n}{n} = 0\) 3) \(\{\frac{\ln n}{n}\}\) is a decreasing sequence
ok..
Did you prove each of them ?
i proved the lim=0 and you tell me i am aloud to use lne=1 to prove decreasing... but does this also prove that a_n>a_n+1 ? this is where i was before you told me about the lne
a_n>a_n+1 is the same as showing that the series decrease
considering that a_n=lnn/n
oh... ok. so what i posted above... where i said "ok, so lets sum this up"... is that correct?
the limit has been proved to be zero you need 1) i think the third step has also been proved but for x>e
the notation is not so great in that reply. you might be right but your prof will give you 0 marks if you submit that http://gyazo.com/d89d7df15ca83f70e4756bd4320e18f1
oh yeah the way you put it is not good :P lol
lol. how should i put it?
\[\lim_{n\to \infty} \ln n/n=\lim_{n\to \infty }\frac{1}{n}=0\] and you don't need lne>ln1 thingy
^
thanks. its just kinda confusing to me that they want me to prove all these things and then just telling them the lim=0 is enough.
hey do we need to show that it is decreasing for any positive n?
Alt Series Test, from my instructions says to prove lim=o and that a_n> a_n+1
that will do for second requirement next, you may use first derivative test to prove that the sequence is decreasing. after that you will be ready to conclude the series converges using alternating series test
my personal response would be the argument that\[\frac{ 1 }{ n }>\frac{ 1 }{ n+1 }\]
Yes. I am also trying to work it without using derivatives : \[n < n+1 \implies \dfrac{1}{n} \gt \dfrac{1}{n+1}\] I'm bit stuck after this.. not sure how to proceed :/
if i can use that... then we have met the requirements
use what ?
derivatives ?
the argument that 1/n> 1/n+1 to satisfy that an is bigger
1/n > 1/(n+1) is true and we can use it but this itself doesn't prove the sequence is decreasing
this is where i get confused, because i thought we proved that with the ln e> x
@ganeshie8 didn't you prove the series decreasing using derivatives? why you trying other alternatives ? i was thinking about ln n/n >0 for any n is this necessary
also, i understand your reasoning. but my instructions do not ask me to prove decreasing. although proving an>an+1 kinda does all by itself, right?
yes that is the same thing
ok. I think i will stick with what we have here then. I TOTALLY appreciate all the help guys. wish i knew how to give more than one medal
there is a way to give more than one medal but its more of like a bug... I'll give medals to everyone that helped in this thread :)
btw sometimes you're not allowed to use derivatives because sequences and series are covered before derivatives and integrals (save integral test)
Ok! thank you!
hmm we didn't do them yet! this is part of calc2 the last thing we deal with is series and sequence in the program
i'm in calc2 still in by parts lol we are slow hahaha
i hate by parts! and i am gonna have to brush back up on that at the the end of this semester because our final is comprehensive
hehehe last two weeks i was doing some interesting by parts integrals
i bet
look through my questions i have posted, you will see all the integration by parts questions i posted
a lot of your question are about series lol actually i like series xD i just need to refresh things
but if you look way back into lets say beginning of january, you will see the integration stuff
i see, i will take a look later gotta go see ya
ok have good one
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!