2.5 Limit laws
By now it should be clear that working directly with the definition of a limit is both difficult and time-consuming! For this reason, we wish to develop some theory to do the work for us.
In this section, we introduce and prove various ‘laws’ for manipulating limits which allow us to deduce new limits automatically from known examples. This is achieved using abstract - arguments like the one used to prove Lemma 2.37.
Addition and multiplication of sequences
The following theorem tells us how convergent sequences behave with respect to the arithmetic operations and .
Suppose and are convergent sequences.
-
1
The sequence is convergent and ;
-
2
The sequence is convergent and ;
-
3
If for all and , then is convergent and
Theorem 2.38 provides us with tools which make working with limits a lot simpler.
We claim that as .
To see this, we apply the limit laws. For large , the behaviour is going to be dominated by the terms involving . We can highlight this by dividing both the numerator and denominator by to give
Since we know as , it follows from parts 1 and 2 of Theorem 2.38 that
Since the limit of the denominator is non-zero, we can apply part 3 of Theorem 2.38 to conclude that
as required.
Using the limit laws, show the following sequences converge and compute their limits.
-
(i)
;
-
(ii)
.
We now turn to discussing the proof of Theorem 2.38. Similar to Lemma 2.37, this involves an abstract - argument. Our goal is to relate the - definition of a limit for and to the - definition applied to the new sequences , and .
Before presenting the details of the proof of Theorem 2.38, we briefly sketch the key idea for part 2 (which is the hardest part). The proof hinges on the elementary identity
This allows us to relate the difference appearing in the - definition for to the differences and appearing in the - definition for and . Similar formulæ are also used to prove part 1 and part 3.
Let and .
-
1.
Let be given. Since and as , by the - definition of a limit, there exists some , such that
Choose . By the triangle inequality,
Thus, by the - definition of a limit, as .
-
2.
By taking absolute values of both sides of (2.4) and applying the triangle inequality, we have
(2.5) (2.5)Let be given. We will further assume . Our goal is to bound the right-hand side of (2.5) by , which we can do by bounding the and terms appropriately. Since and as , by the - definition of a limit, there exists some , such that
Choose . Recalling (2.5), for all with it follows that
We have shown that the - definition holds for all . However, by applying the above to , this implies that the definition holds for all . Thus, as .
-
3.
We first show that the sequence is convergent and as . The idea behind the proof is similar to that used above; we leave the details to Exercise 2.41 below.
Since as and as , we can use the result from part 2 to conclude that as , as required.
∎
Let be a convergent sequence with for all and suppose . Show that as , and thereby complete the proof of part 3 of Theorem 2.38.
The squeeze theorem
Theorem 2.38 describe how limits interact with the arithmetic operations and . We can also consider how limits interact with the order on .
Suppose , , are three sequences such that:
-
(i)
for all , and
-
(ii)
and are convergent and for some .
Then is convergent and .
Consider the sequence .
The terms of the sequence satisfy for all , since we know that for all .55 5 Here (and also in the worksheets) we use the function, which we haven’t formally defined (but which, of course, you are familiar with from high school). Since we’ve gone to great lengths to formally define other expressions such as , it seems remiss not to do the same for . However, for now, we shall assume a working knowledge of trigonometric functions, in order to furnish our theory with additional examples. We shall come back to the question of their formal definition later. We know from Example 2.25 that as , and it follows from the limit laws that as .
Hence, by the squeeze theorem (applied to , and ), we conclude that as .
Let so that, by the - definition of a limit, there exist , such that
Let . If with , then it follows that
In particular, . Thus, by the - definition of a limit, as . ∎
Use the squeeze theorem to show as .
Let be a nonempty set which is bounded above, so that exists by the completeness axiom.
-
(i)
For each , show there exists some such that .
-
(ii)
Conclude that the sequence satisfies for all and as .
Let and be convergent sequences.
-
(i)
Suppose for all . Show that .
-
(ii)
Suppose for all . Is it necessarily true that ?