Results 1 to 8 of 8

Math Help - Limit Superior Definition Proof

  1. #1
    Newbie
    Joined
    Nov 2012
    From
    US
    Posts
    7

    Limit Superior Definition Proof

    Maybe someone can help me out, I thought I had an idea but I don't think it is right.



    I am trying to prove the above. My attempt:

    I am given that the lim sup Xn is finite, which I think means it exists, which I will call L. So I have a sequence [Xn] = [x1, x2, x3,... xn, xn+1,....] and another sequence [Xm] = [xn, xn+1,...]. This is where I am stuck, I don't know where the next step should be. I have an idea that if I can show [Xm] is monotonically decreasing then the sup of [Xm] is Xn and then taking the limit of Xn gives me L, which would complete the proof, I think. But, I don't know how to show that the sequence is monotonically decreasing, or if it even is... it was just an idea. Any help/hints would be appreciated!
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    18,663
    Thanks
    1616
    Awards
    1

    Re: Limit Superior Definition Proof

    Quote Originally Posted by Math150 View Post
    Maybe someone can help me out, I thought I had an idea but I don't think it is right.

    I am trying to prove the above.
    How does one prove a definition?
    What definition of \limsup have you been given if it is otherwise.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Newbie
    Joined
    Nov 2012
    From
    US
    Posts
    7

    Re: Limit Superior Definition Proof

    Thanks for replying Plato, and I know it seems weird to prove a def, I guess I mean to just show that it is true. I've defined lim sup to be the supremum of the set of subsequential limit points of the sequence, {Xn}... The problem lets me assume that the set is finite, so I've been calling the sup of the set, L.


    So the set of subsequential limits = [..., L] I have to show somehow that the lim sup Xm (m>=n) is also L.

    I read somewhere that if I have a sequence [An] then I can define a new sequence [Bn] = sup Ak, k>=m = sup [An, An+1, An+2,...] I am trying to incorporate this and get something out of it because then the sequence Bn is montone decreasing
    Last edited by Math150; November 13th 2012 at 11:05 AM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    Newbie
    Joined
    Nov 2012
    From
    US
    Posts
    7

    Re: Limit Superior Definition Proof

    Okay the last post is getting cluttered, I am trying to work on a new solution. I have:

    Given a sequence Sn = {S1, S2, S3, ... Sn, Sn+1,...}
    Let E be the set of subsequential limits of Sn. Assume E is finite then E= {....L}
    This means that the Lim sup Sn = L.

    Now for the right half of the equation. Set Tn = sup Sk , k>=n. Then by substitution we have Lim Tn on the right.

    So as of now it is:

    L = Lim Tn (n goes to infinity) ... I just need to show this somehow.

    L = Lim sup (Sn, Sn+1,...)

    I know that Tn is a decreasing and bounded sequence so it does converge, but I just don't know how to show it is equal to L or the limit superior of Sn.
    Last edited by Math150; November 13th 2012 at 11:57 AM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    18,663
    Thanks
    1616
    Awards
    1

    Re: Limit Superior Definition Proof

    Quote Originally Posted by Math150 View Post
    Given a sequence Sn = {S1, S2, S3, ... Sn, Sn+1,...}
    Let E be the set of subsequential limits of Sn. Assume E is finite then E= {....L}
    This means that the Lim sup Xn = L.
    I really am not sure of what you are about here.
    But any finite set contains a maximum term.
    If E is the set of subsequential limits of (S_n) and E is finite then \limsup(S_n)=\max(E).
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    Newbie
    Joined
    Nov 2012
    From
    US
    Posts
    7

    Re: Limit Superior Definition Proof

    Okay, I thought it was the last term, but if it's maximum I will just reword it... All I meant to do was denote the maximum as L.

    also that last line in quoted text should be Sn, not Xn.


    Can I say as n is going to infinity, n must be getting closer and closer to k... so at some point I will have that sup Sn -> Sup Sk which would be lim (Tn) => lim sup (Sk) => lim sup (Sn) => L. ... On second thought this might not make much sense.


    I just need to find a way to show that the decreasing and bounded Tn satisfies:

    Lim Tn as n-> infinity = L

    Where Tn is sup Sk for k>=n

    Just thinking... since Tn is decreasing and bounded then the Lim of Tn must be = inf Tn.
    Last edited by Math150; November 13th 2012 at 12:26 PM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  7. #7
    Newbie
    Joined
    Nov 2012
    From
    US
    Posts
    7

    Re: Limit Superior Definition Proof

    Can I say that the existence of the limit superior means that Sn is bounded above, L. If I define Tn as sup Sk k>=n then:

    T1 = sup {S1, S2, S3, S4,...}
    T2 = sup {S2, S3, S4, ...}
    T3 = sup {S3, S4,...}

    This shows that each one is a subset of the one before and thus are decreasing. So: T1>T2>T3>... Tk-1>Tk>... Each T is bounded below and above (by the original Sn) So the Limit of Tn is then the same as the upper bound, L. Does this make sense?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  8. #8
    Newbie
    Joined
    Nov 2012
    From
    florida
    Posts
    2

    Re: Limit Superior Definition Proof

    Quote Originally Posted by Plato View Post
    How does one prove a definition?
    What definition of \limsup have you been given if it is otherwise.
    I have been asked to prove the same thing... I too do not understand WHY we have been asked to prove a definition but there it is! I suppose it's sufficient to show that since E is bounded above (by s*=lim sup(xn)), if any subsequence were to have a limit (sup xm) greater than the upper bound of E, that would contradict the definition of E and its boundedness? I'm not coming up with any better ideas!
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Limit superior proof
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: July 30th 2012, 09:11 AM
  2. limit superior/inferior proof
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: February 10th 2011, 04:36 AM
  3. Limits and Limit Superior proof
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 25th 2010, 10:56 PM
  4. Real analysis: Limit superior proof
    Posted in the Differential Geometry Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 16th 2010, 09:14 PM
  5. limit superior proof
    Posted in the Calculus Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: October 30th 2007, 07:02 PM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum