Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
net/publication/314407207
CITATIONS READS
0 30
1 author:
Douglas Azevedo
Federal University of Technology - Paraná/Brazil (UTFPR)
9 PUBLICATIONS 14 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Douglas Azevedo on 09 March 2017.
Abstract
In this paper we present necessary and sufficient conditions for the convergence and diver-
gence of series of positive terms. Our is approach based on extensions of the Kummer’s test,
from which we extract such characterizations. Some interesting consequences and examples
of this extensions are presented. In particular, we present necessary and sufficient condi-
tions for the summability of subsequences of a given sequence and extensions to the well
known tests of convergence of series: Raabe’s test, Gauss’s test and Bertrand’s test. We
also present a version of the Olivier’s theorem without the usual monotonicity requirement.
A “weak-version” of the Ermakoff’s test is presented as well.
Keywords: Summability of subsequences, Kummer’s test, convergence of series,
divergence of series, Raabe’s test, Bertrand’s test, Gauss’s test, Olivier’s Theorem.
2010 MSC: 40A05 , 40A30.
1. Introduction
Let {an } be a sequence of positive real numbers. An infinite series generated by {an }
is the sequence {sn } defined as sn = a1 +P... + anP, for all positive integer n. In order to
simplify notations it is common to write an := ∞ n=1 an to represent the infinite series,
even though this notation also represents P
limn→∞ sn .
In what follows a series of the form cn an will be called by series of positive terms
whenever {cn } and {an } are both sequences of positive real numbers.
The Kummer’s test is an advanced theoretical test which provides necessary and sufficient
conditions that ensures convergence and divergence of series of positive terms. Below we
present the statement of this result. Its proof and some additional historical background
may be found in [2, 9, 15].
∗
I am corresponding author
Email address: dgs.nvn@gmail.com (Douglas Azevedo)
2. Summability of subsequences
We start this section by presenting our first main result. As the reader will see, it is
an extension of Theorem 1.1 however, its main feature is that it characterizes summable
subsequences of a given sequence of positive numbers.
Theorem 2.1. Let {an } be a sequence of positive real numbers and φ : [1, ∞[→]0, ∞[ a
function such that φ(x) > x, for all x ≥ 1 with φ(n) being a positive integer for all n ≥ 1.
Suppose that there exists a positive sequence {pn } such that
an
pn − pφ(n) ≥ c,
aφ(n)
P∞
for some c > 0, for all n sufficiently large and lim pn an = 0. Then n=1 aφ(n) converges.
The converse holds, as well.
pn an −pn+1 an+1 +pn+1 an+1 −pn+2 an+2 +...−aφ(n−1) pφ(n−1) +aφ(n−1) pφ(n−1) −aφ(n) pφ(n) ≥ caφ(n) ,
3
N
X +k N
X +k N
X +k
pn an − pn+1 an+1 + ... + aφ(n−1) pφ(n−1) − aφ(n) pφ(n) ≥ c aφ(n) > 0,
n=N n=N n=N
N
X +k
pN aN − pN +k+1 aN +k+1 + ... + aφ(N −1) pφ(N −1) − aφ(N +k) pφ(N +k) ≥ c aφ(n) > 0,
n=N
φ(N −1) ∞
X X
p n an ≥ c aφ(n) > 0.
n=N n=N
P
Therefore, aφ(n) converges.
Conversely, define Pn
S− i=1 aφ(i)
pn = , n = 1, 2, 3... ,
an
P
where S = aφ(n) . Thus, for this pn we have that
φ(n)
n
!
X X
pn an − aφ(n) pφ(n) = S− aφ(i) − S − aφ(i)
i=1 i=1
φ(n)
X
= aφ(i)
i=n+1
≥ aφ(n) , for all n ≥ 1.
From the definition of sequence {pn } it is clear that lim pn an = 0. The proof is concluded.
Theorem 2.2. Let {an } be a sequence of positive real numbers and φ : [1, ∞[→]0, ∞[ a
function such that φ(x) > x, for all x ≥ 1, with φ(n) being an positive integer for all positive
integer n. P 1
Suppose that there exists a positive sequence {pn } such that pφ(n)
diverges, pn an ≥ p1 a1 ,
and
an
pn − pφ(n) ≤ 0,
aφ(n)
for all n sufficiently . Then ∞
P
n=1 aφ(n) diverges. The converse holds, as well.
4
P P 1
Proof. From the assumptions we obtain that aφ(n) ≥ p1 a1 pφ(n)
. By the comparsion
P
test, the divergence of the series
P on the right implies the divergence of aφ(n) .
Conversely, suppose that aφ(n) diverges. Define for each n ≥ 1
Pn
ai
pn = i=1 .
an
Note that the definition implies p1 = 1, hence an pn = ni=1 ai ≥ a1 , for all n ≥ 1, that is,
P
an pn ≥ a1 p1 for all n ≥
P1. 1 P
Let us show that pφ(n)
diverges. From the divergence of aφ(n) , given any positive
integer m there exists a positive integer n ≥ m such that
Due to (1),
n
X 1 aφ(m) aφ(n)
= + ... +
p
j=m φ(j)
a1 + ... + aφ(m) a1 + ... + aφ(n)
1
= a1 +...+aφ(m−1)
aφ(m) +...+aφ(n)
+1
1
> 2
.
Pn 1
P 1
That is, j=1 pφ(j) is not a Cauchy sequence. Therefore the series pφ(n)
diverges.
One interesting consequence of the Theorems 2.1 e 2.2 is a weak version of the Er-
makoff’s test (see [9, p. 296 and p.298]). The reader will note that there is no monotonicity
requirement on the sequence, however the summability is obtained only for a subsequence.
Corollary 2.2.1 (weak-Ermakoff’s test). Let {an } be a sequence of positive terms, φ(x) >
x be any monotone increasing positive differentiable function for which φ(n) is a positive
integer for all n ≥ 1. If
(i)
0
φ (n) aφ(n)
≤ v < 1,
an
1
P
for all n large and lim sup φ0 (φ(n)) = u ≤ 1, then aφ(n) converges.
(ii)
0
φ (n) aφ(n)
≥ 1,
an
P 0 1
P
for all n large, with φ (n) divergent and lim inf φ0 (φ(n)) = u ≥ 1, then aφ(n) diverges
5
Proof. (i) The assumption implies that
1 an 1
0 ≥ > 1,
φ (n) aφ(n) v
for all n sufficiently large. That is
1 an 1 1 1
0 − 0 ≥ − 0 > 0,
φ (n) aφ(n) φ (φ(n)) v φ (φ(n))
for all n sufficiently large. The conclusion of the proof follows from an application of Theorem
1
2.1 with pn = φ(n) .
(ii) In this case we have that
1 an 1 1
0 − 0 ≤1− 0 ≤ 0,
φ (n) aφ(n) φ (φ(n)) φ (φ(n))
for all n sufficiently large.
P
3. Series of the form cn an
Let us now turn our atention to series of the form ∞
P
n=1 cn an with positive terms. The
central idea in the following result is that it characterizes the relation between the sequences
{cn } and {an } in order to ensure the convergence of the series. The proof follows the same
lines of the proof of Theorem 2.1.
P∞
Theorem 3.1. Consider the series n=1 cn an with {an } {cn } sequences of positive real
numbers.
The series ∞
P
n=1 cn an converges if and only if that there exist a sequence {pn } of positive
real numbers and a positive integer N ≥ 1 for which
an
pn − pn+1 ≥ cn+1 , n ≥ N.
an+1
Proof. Let us show that ∞
P
n=1 cn an converges. For this, note that the condition
an
pn − pn+1 ≥ cn+1 , n ≥ N
an+1
implies that
an pn ≥ an+1 (pn+1 + cn+1 ), n ≥ N. (2)
That is,
k+1
X
aN p N ≥ r ci ai + aN +k+1 pN +k+1
i=1
k+1
X
≥ r ci ai > 0,
i=1
6
P∞
for all integer k ≥ 0. This implies the convergence
P∞ of n=1 cn an .
For the converse, suppose that S := n=1 cn an and let us define
S − ni=1 ci ai
P
pn = , n ≥ N. (3)
an
For this {pn }, clearly pn > 0 for all n ≥ 1 and it is easy to check that
an
pn − pn+1 = cn+1 , n ≥ N.
an+1
Some remarks:
(i) One can observe that it is, of course, possible to reduce any series to this form , as
any number can be expressed as the product of two other numbers. Success in applying the
above theorem will depend on the skill with which the terms are so split up.
(ii) Note that in the first part of Theorem 3.1, the assumption of positivity of the
sequences {an } and
P{c n } can be replaced by the following assumptions: {an } is positive and
k
{cn } is such that i=1 ci ai > 0 for all k sufficiently large.
P∞Next, we presente a version of the Kummer’s test for divergent series of the form
n=1 cn an . The reader will note that it is more restrictive when it is compared to The-
orem 1.1-(ii) however it may be suitable in some cases.
P∞
Theorem 3.2. Consider the series n=1 cn an with {an } {cn } sequences of positive real
numbers.
(i) Suppose that there exist a sequence {pn } and a positive integer N for which
an
pn − pn+1 ≤ −cn+1 , n ≥ N
an+1
P∞ 1 P∞ P∞ 1 P∞
with
P∞ n=1 p n
being a divergent series. Then n=1
P∞
an , n=1 cn , n=1 (pn − cn )an and
cn
n=1 pn an diverge. If, in addition, lim 6= 0 then n=1 cn an diverges.
P∞ p n P∞
(ii) Suppose that both series n=1 cn an and n=1 an diverge. Also, suppose that for
every m ∈ N there exists r ∈ N such that
am + ... + ar ≥ cm am + ... + cr ar .
P∞ 1
Then there exist a sequence {pn } and a positive integer N ≥ 1 such that n=1 pn diverges
an
pn − pn+1 ≤ −cn+1 , n ≥ N.
an+1
If we take s = max{n, r} then both (8) and (9) holds, that is,
From this previous conclusions, by the definition of {pn } we have that for each m ∈ N there
exists s ∈ N, s > m, such that,
s
X 1 am as
= + ... +
p
n=m n
c1 a1 + ... + cm am c1 a1 + ... + cs as
am + ... + as
≥
c1 a1 + ... + cs as
cm am + ... + cs as
≥
c1 a1 + ... + cs as
1 1
≥ c1 a1 +...+cm−1 am−1 > ,
cm am +...+cs as
+1 2
− an
R [{cn }, {an }] = {pn }, pn − pn+1 ≤ −cn+1 , for all n ∈ N sufficiently large .
an+1
Recall that a subset C of a real vector space V is called a linear convex cone if, for each
c1 , c2 ∈ C and α, β > 0, αc1 + βc2 ∈ C.
Theorem 4.1. The sets R+ [{cn }, {an }] and R− [{cn }, {an }] are linear convex cones of NR .
Proof. We will present the proof for R+ [{cn }, {an }]. The proof for R− [{cn }, {an }] follows
the same lines.
Given any {pn } and {qn } in R+ [{cn }, {an }] we have that
an
pn − pn+1 ≥ cn+1
an+1
and
an
qn − qn+1 ≥ cn+1 ,
an+1
for all n sufficiently large.
For any α, β > 0, it is clear that αpn + βqn ∈ R[{cn }, {an }], since
αpn + βqn an αpn+1 + βqn+1
− ≥ cn+1 ,
α+β an+1 α+β
Example 4.2. For any fixed r > 0, there is no sequence {pn } of positive numbers that
satisfies
n+1
pn − pn+1 ≥ r,
n
for all n large.
To show this, suppose the existence of such sequence. Now note that this last inequality
may be rewritten as
1/n
pn − pn+1 ≥ r,
1/(n + 1)
for
P∞some r > 0. From Theorem 3.1 with an = 1/n and cn = r this last would imply that
1
n=1 n is convergent, which is false.
This example illustrates the connection of Kummer’s test with the theory of solutions of
difference equation. For instance, we may use Theorem 3.1 to ensure solution for certain
10
classes of difference equations: Given sequences {an } and {cn } of positive numbers, there
exists a positive sequence {pn } that satisfies the inequality
The next three theorems are extensions of the Raabe, Bertrand and Gauss test derived
from Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 3.2. For more information about these tests we refer to
[2, 9] and references therein.
Consider the sequences
an
Rn− = n − (n + 1) − cn+1 ,
an+1
an
Rn+ = n − (n + 1) + cn+1 ,
an+1
for all positive integer n.
P
Theorem 4.3 (Raabe’s test). Let cn an be a series of positive terms and suppose that
− −
lim inf Rn = R1 and lim sup Rn = R2 . If
(i) R1 ≥ 0, then the series converges;
(ii) R2 ≤ 0 and lim cn /n 6= 0 then the series diverges.
P
Theorem 4.4 (Bertrand’s test). Let cn an be a series of positive terms.
(i) If
an 1 θn + cn+1
≥1+ + ,
an+1 n n ln(n)
P
for some sequence {θn }, such that lim inf θn ≥ 1, all n sufficiently large, then cn an con-
verges.
11
(ii) If
an 1 θn − cn+1
≤1+ + ,
an+1 n n ln(n)
Psequence {θn }, such that lim sup θn ≤ 1 all n sufficiently large and lim cn /(n ln(n)) 6=
for some
0 then cn an diverges.
Proof. (i) From the assumption we get
an
n ln(n) ≥ n ln(n) + ln(n) + cn+1 + θn ,
an+1
for all n sufficiently large. That is,
an n
n ln(n) − (n + 1) ln(n + 1) ≥ (n + 1) ln + θn + cn+1 ,
an+1 n+1
n
for all n sufficiently large. Since lim inf(n + 1) ln n+1 θn ≥ 0 we conclude that
an
n ln(n) − (n + 1) ln(n + 1) ≥ cn+1 ,
an+1
for all n sufficiently large. Therefore the conclusion follows from Theorem 3.1.
(ii) It suffices to note that
an n
n ln(n) − (n + 1) ln(n + 1) ≤ (n + 1) ln + θn − cn+1 ,
an+1 n+1
n
for all n sufficiently large. Hence, due to, lim sup(n + 1) ln n+1 θn ≤ 0, it follows that
an
n ln(n) − (n + 1) ln(n + 1) ≤ −cn+1 ,
an+1
for all n sufficiently large. The conclusion follows from Theorem 3.2 since lim cn /(n ln(n)) 6=
0.
P
Theorem 4.5 (Gauss’s test). Let cn an be a series of positive, γ ≥ 1, {θn } a bounded
sequence terms.
(i) If, for some µ ≥ 1
an cn+1 µ θn
≥1+ + + γ,
an+1 n n n
P
for all n sufficiently large, then cn an converges.
(ii) If lim cn /n 6= 0 and , for some µ < 1,
an cn+1 µ θn
≤1− + + γ,
an+1 n n n
P
for all n sufficiently large, then cn an diverges.
12
Proof. (i) From the assumption we obtain that
an θn
n − (n + 1) ≥ cn+1 + (µ − 1) + γ−1 ,
an+1 n
θn
for all n sufficiently large. Take N > 0 such that µ − 1 + nγ−1 ≥ 0 for all n > N , we concude
that
an
n − (n + 1) ≥ cn+1 ,
an+1
P
for all n > N . Therefore, Theorem 3.1 applies and implies that cn an converges.
(ii) Due to the assumptions on (ii), we have that µ − 1 < 0 and
an θn
n − (n + 1) ≤ −cn+1 + (µ − 1) + γ−1 ≤ −cn+1 ,
an+1 n
for all n sufficiently large. The conclusion follows from an applications of Theorem 3.2.
Example 4.6. Let us illustrate the use of Theorem 3.1 with a simple example. To see that
∞
X 1
n=1
n2
To see that this series converges, we may take an = 1/n2 , cn = n − n2 sin n1 and consider
For a sequence {an } of decreasing positive terms, combining Lemma 4.10 with Theorem
3.1, we obtain a test for convergence.
Theorem 4.11. ∞
P
n=1 an converges if, and only if, there exists a sequence {pn } of positive
numbers such that
pn − 2pn+1 ≥ 2a2n+1 ,
for all n sufficiently large, for some r > 0.
14
Proof. By Lemma 4.10 an coverges if, and only if, 2n a2n converges. If we define an = 2n
P P
and cn = a2n+1 then, by Theorem 3.1, this last series converges if, and only if, there exists a
positive sequence {pn } such that
pn − 2pn+1 ≥ 2a2n+1 ,
Example 4.12. Let {an } be summable decreasing sequence of positive real numbers. It is
well know that lim n an = 0. This result is often called Olivier’s Theorem (see page 124 of
[9, p.124] or [3]). We will show that we can obtain this asymptotic behaviour of {an } if
we omit the monotoniticy of this sequence when we consider additional assumptions on the
sequence {pn } (that on in Theorem 3.1). P
For this,
P1 consider a sequence {an } of positive real numbers. If an converges then it is
clear that n
nan also converges. From Theorem 3.1, with an = 1/n and cn = nan , we can
conclude that this last series converges if, and only if, there exists a sequence {pn } such that
n+1
pn − pn+1 ≥ (n + 1)an+1 > 0,
n
for all n sufficiently large. As so, lim nan = 0 certainly occurs when the sequence {pn } above
is such that
n+1 pn
lim pn − pn+1 = lim pn − pn+1 + = 0.
n n
For instance, we see that lim nan = 0, whenever the sequence {pn } above converges .
For more information on this asymptotic behavior we refer to [3, 10, 14] and references
therein.
An immediate consequence of Theorem 3.1 is {an } ∈ `2 if, and only if, there exists a sequence
{pn } of positive numbers such that
cn aα+1
n − cn+1 aα+1
n+1 ≥ cn+1 an+1 ,
P
for all n sufficiently large, then cn an converges.
Note that this is a application of Theorem 3.1, in which pn = cn aαn .
15
The following result is known as Abel’s partial summation formula.
Lemma 4.15. [9, p. 313] If {an } and {cn } are sequences of real numbers and Ai :=
a1 + ... + ai , for all i ≥ 1 then
n+k
X n+k
X
c i ai = Ai (ci − ci+1 ) − An cn+1 + An+k cn+k+1 ,
i=n+1 i=n+1
We close the section combining Theorem 3.1 and Lemma 4.15 in order to obtain another
test for convergence of series.
Theorem 4.16. Let {an } and {cn } be sequences of positive real numbers with {cn } decreas-
ing. Suppose that
(i) lim An cn+1 exists,
(ii) There exists a sequence of positive numbers {pn } such that
An
pn − pn+1 ≥ cn+1 − cn+2 ,
An+1
P
for all n sufficiently large. Then cn an converges .
5. Concluding remarks
In this paper, we proposed and investigated extension for the Kummer’s characterization
of convergence and divergence of series. Our main focus was the study of Psummability of
subsequences of a given sequence and summability of series of the form cn an , in which
{cn } and {an } are sequences of positive real numbers.
As we have pointed out previously, the main feature of our results is that they present
(i) how a subsequence relates to the sequence (via an auxiliary sequence {pn }) in order Pto be
summable or not; (ii) how {cn } and {an } relates to each other in order to the series c n an
converges or diverges. From this relations we derived several theoretical consequences. How-
ever, we believe that more important consequences may be obtained from our results.
16
References
[1] R.P. Agnew, Summability of subsequences, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. Volume 50, Number 8 (1944), 596-
598. 2
[2] L. Bourchtein; A. Bourchtein; G. Nornberg and C. Venzke, A Hierarchy of the Convergence Tests Related
to Cauchy’s Test. Int. Journal of Math. Analysis, Vol. 6, 2012, no. 38, 1847 - 1869. 1, 11
[3] C. P. Niculescu; F. Popovici, A note on the behavior of integrable functions at infinity. J. Math. Anal.
Appl. 381 (2011) 742-747 . 3, 9, 15
[4] R. G Cooke, Infinite matrices and sequence spaces, Macmillan, 1950. 2
[5] D. F. Dawson, Summability of subsequences and stretchings of sequences, Pacific J. Math. Volume 44,
Number 2 (1973), 455-460. 2
[6] I. Gyori,; L. Horvath, lp -solutions and stability analysis of difference equations using the Kummer’s test,
Applied Mathematics and Computation, 217 (2011) 10129–10145. 2
[7] J. Hadamard, Deux theoremes d’Abel sur la convergence des series, Acta. Math., 27 (1903), 177-183. 2
[8] F. R. Keogh, G. M. Petersen Riez summability of subsequences, Q. J. Math (1961) 12 (1): 33-44. 2
[9] K. Knopp, Theory and application of infinite series, Blackie & Son Limited, London and Glascow, 1954.
1, 2, 3, 5, 9, 11, 14, 15, 16
[10] E. Liflyanda, S. Tikhonovb, M. Zeltserc, Extending tests for convergence of number series. J. Math.
Anal. Appl., 377 (2011) 194-206. 15
[11] J. Muscat, Functional Analysis An Introduction to Metric Spaces, Hilbert Spaces, and Banach Algebras,
Springer, 2014. 2
[12] Zbigniew Nitecki Cantorvals and Subsum Sets of Null Sequences 2
[13] C. P. Niculescu, F. Popovici, A note on the behavior of integrable functions at infinity, J. Math. Anal.
Appl. 381 (2011) 742-747.
[14] T. Sálat, V. Tomma, A Classical Olivier’s Theorem and Statistical Convergence, Annales
mathématiques Blaise Pascal, Vol. 10, (2003) 305-313 3, 9, 15
[15] J. Tong, Kummer’sTest Gives Characterizations for Convergence or Divergence of all Positive Series,
The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 101, No. 5 (1994), 450-452. 1, 2
17