Verification of $lim_{n rightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n^3}=1$ [duplicate]
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
This question already has an answer here:
Proof that $lim_{nrightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n}=1$
6 answers
I am interested in the limit
$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n^3}$$
Can we simply conclude that:
$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} (sqrt[n]{n})^3= 1^3=1.$$
I have proven that $sqrt[n]{n}rightarrow1$ earlier in this textbook. Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
real-analysis limits
marked as duplicate by Nosrati, Community♦ Nov 25 at 6:03
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
This question already has an answer here:
Proof that $lim_{nrightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n}=1$
6 answers
I am interested in the limit
$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n^3}$$
Can we simply conclude that:
$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} (sqrt[n]{n})^3= 1^3=1.$$
I have proven that $sqrt[n]{n}rightarrow1$ earlier in this textbook. Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
real-analysis limits
marked as duplicate by Nosrati, Community♦ Nov 25 at 6:03
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
1
Yes, if you already know $sqrt[n]nto 1$
– Hagen von Eitzen
Nov 21 at 21:08
This is a lemma the book had us prove earlier, also the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
– Wesley Strik
Nov 21 at 21:08
Please include some text in your title besides just mathjax formatting.
– amWhy
Nov 21 at 21:13
Thanks Hagen, I do now that :)
– Wesley Strik
Nov 21 at 21:18
"Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit." Has that been proven? If so... you are good. If not, you must justify it (it is true by the way).
– fleablood
Nov 21 at 22:19
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
This question already has an answer here:
Proof that $lim_{nrightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n}=1$
6 answers
I am interested in the limit
$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n^3}$$
Can we simply conclude that:
$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} (sqrt[n]{n})^3= 1^3=1.$$
I have proven that $sqrt[n]{n}rightarrow1$ earlier in this textbook. Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
real-analysis limits
This question already has an answer here:
Proof that $lim_{nrightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n}=1$
6 answers
I am interested in the limit
$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n^3}$$
Can we simply conclude that:
$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} (sqrt[n]{n})^3= 1^3=1.$$
I have proven that $sqrt[n]{n}rightarrow1$ earlier in this textbook. Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
This question already has an answer here:
Proof that $lim_{nrightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n}=1$
6 answers
real-analysis limits
real-analysis limits
edited Nov 21 at 21:14
amWhy
191k28223439
191k28223439
asked Nov 21 at 21:06
Wesley Strik
1,373322
1,373322
marked as duplicate by Nosrati, Community♦ Nov 25 at 6:03
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
marked as duplicate by Nosrati, Community♦ Nov 25 at 6:03
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
1
Yes, if you already know $sqrt[n]nto 1$
– Hagen von Eitzen
Nov 21 at 21:08
This is a lemma the book had us prove earlier, also the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
– Wesley Strik
Nov 21 at 21:08
Please include some text in your title besides just mathjax formatting.
– amWhy
Nov 21 at 21:13
Thanks Hagen, I do now that :)
– Wesley Strik
Nov 21 at 21:18
"Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit." Has that been proven? If so... you are good. If not, you must justify it (it is true by the way).
– fleablood
Nov 21 at 22:19
add a comment |
1
Yes, if you already know $sqrt[n]nto 1$
– Hagen von Eitzen
Nov 21 at 21:08
This is a lemma the book had us prove earlier, also the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
– Wesley Strik
Nov 21 at 21:08
Please include some text in your title besides just mathjax formatting.
– amWhy
Nov 21 at 21:13
Thanks Hagen, I do now that :)
– Wesley Strik
Nov 21 at 21:18
"Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit." Has that been proven? If so... you are good. If not, you must justify it (it is true by the way).
– fleablood
Nov 21 at 22:19
1
1
Yes, if you already know $sqrt[n]nto 1$
– Hagen von Eitzen
Nov 21 at 21:08
Yes, if you already know $sqrt[n]nto 1$
– Hagen von Eitzen
Nov 21 at 21:08
This is a lemma the book had us prove earlier, also the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
– Wesley Strik
Nov 21 at 21:08
This is a lemma the book had us prove earlier, also the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
– Wesley Strik
Nov 21 at 21:08
Please include some text in your title besides just mathjax formatting.
– amWhy
Nov 21 at 21:13
Please include some text in your title besides just mathjax formatting.
– amWhy
Nov 21 at 21:13
Thanks Hagen, I do now that :)
– Wesley Strik
Nov 21 at 21:18
Thanks Hagen, I do now that :)
– Wesley Strik
Nov 21 at 21:18
"Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit." Has that been proven? If so... you are good. If not, you must justify it (it is true by the way).
– fleablood
Nov 21 at 22:19
"Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit." Has that been proven? If so... you are good. If not, you must justify it (it is true by the way).
– fleablood
Nov 21 at 22:19
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Yes, we can simply do that. Since the exponent $^3$ is a constant neutral number (meaning we may interpret it as a fixed number of multiplications) we can move the limit inside of it. So if you already know $lim_{ntoinfty}sqrt[n]n=1$ then that's a full proof.
This answer is insufficient. It is not enough to state that the exponent is constant. An essential property is missing.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 10:06
@YvesDaoust Raising to the power of a constant is continuous around $1$?
– Arthur
Nov 22 at 10:46
This is precisely the missing property. By the way, even a variable exponent would yield a continuous function.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 14:37
@YvesDaoust Sure you can do it with a variable exponent as well, but then you have to be extra careful. You can't put the limit inside of, say, $sqrt[n]{n}^n$ and expect to get a sensible answer. You need a constant exponent for that (or at least an exponent converging to a nice value). And I could argue for this without continuity of exponentiation at all. Just using that $sqrt[n]{n}^3 = sqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}$, and you can take the limits of those separately (something which is usually proven quite early and taken as implicit).
– Arthur
Nov 22 at 14:40
What I mean is that "since the exponent $^3$ is constant" is not the reason.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 15:00
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
Yes we are allowed to do that since for continuity
$$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)=Lin mathbb{R} implies lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)]^k=left[lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)right]^k=L^k$$
Indeed in that particular case since $sqrt[n]{n}to 1$
$$forall epsilon>0 quad exists bar n quad forall n>bar n quad |sqrt[n]{n}-1|<epsilon$$
we have that, assuming $sqrt[n]{n}<2$, $forall bar epsilon=7epsilon>0$
$$|(sqrt[n]{n})^3-1|=|sqrt[n]{n}-1|cdot |sqrt[n]{n^2}+sqrt[n]{n}+1|< 7epsilon=bar epsilon quad forall n>bar n$$
and then $(sqrt[n]{n})^3to 1$.
1
You would need this to be an "if and only if" for this to apply here.
– Will Sherwood
Nov 21 at 21:15
@WillSherwood Yes but in that case the asker was interested in that particular implication. Do you think that this is the motivation for the downvoting? Thanks
– gimusi
Nov 21 at 21:24
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
You know that
$sqrt[n]{n}
to 1$.
Also
$sqrt[n]{n^k}
=(sqrt[n]{n})^k
$
so
$begin{array}\
sqrt[n]{n^k}-1
&=(sqrt[n]{n})^k-1\
&=(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j\
text{so}\
|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)||sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^n|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |n|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|kn\
end{array}
$
Therefore,
to make
$|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
le epsilon$,
choose $n$ large enough
so that
$|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|
le frac{epsilon}{kn}
$.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
You can if you know four things.
1) If $f$ is continuous and $a_n to M$ and for all $a_n$ that $f(a_n)$ is defined and $f(M)$ is defined then $a_nto M$ means $f(a_n) to f(M)$.
But you DO have to prove this sometime. I'm sure your text has proven that somewhere.
And
2) you need to know that $sqrt[n]{n} to 1$.
But you claim you have already shown that.
And 3) that $sqrt[n]{n^3} = (sqrt[n]{n})^3$.
Which is basic. It follows that as for all $M > 0$ and $nin mathbb N$ there is a unique $k = sqrt[n]{M}$ so that $k^n = M$. And as $(k^j)^n= (k^n)^j = M^j; for j in mathbb N$ it follows that $(sqrt[n]{M})^j= sqrt[n]{M^3}$.
And finally you need to know 4) that $()^3: mathbb R to mathbb R$ is continuous.
Which is .... basic. But you should have proven that sometime.
So $lim sqrt[n]{n^3} = lim (sqrt[n]{n})^3 = (lim sqrt[n]{n})^3 = 1^3 =1$.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
Yes, because the cubic root function is continuous, so that you can swap the limit and the root.
Continuity at $1$ is ensured by the fact that
$$|sqrt[3]{1+delta}-1|=left|frac{delta}{(sqrt[3]{1+delta})^2+sqrt[3]{1+delta}+1}right|<fracdelta3<epsilon$$ holds with $delta<3epsilon$.
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Yes, we can simply do that. Since the exponent $^3$ is a constant neutral number (meaning we may interpret it as a fixed number of multiplications) we can move the limit inside of it. So if you already know $lim_{ntoinfty}sqrt[n]n=1$ then that's a full proof.
This answer is insufficient. It is not enough to state that the exponent is constant. An essential property is missing.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 10:06
@YvesDaoust Raising to the power of a constant is continuous around $1$?
– Arthur
Nov 22 at 10:46
This is precisely the missing property. By the way, even a variable exponent would yield a continuous function.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 14:37
@YvesDaoust Sure you can do it with a variable exponent as well, but then you have to be extra careful. You can't put the limit inside of, say, $sqrt[n]{n}^n$ and expect to get a sensible answer. You need a constant exponent for that (or at least an exponent converging to a nice value). And I could argue for this without continuity of exponentiation at all. Just using that $sqrt[n]{n}^3 = sqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}$, and you can take the limits of those separately (something which is usually proven quite early and taken as implicit).
– Arthur
Nov 22 at 14:40
What I mean is that "since the exponent $^3$ is constant" is not the reason.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 15:00
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Yes, we can simply do that. Since the exponent $^3$ is a constant neutral number (meaning we may interpret it as a fixed number of multiplications) we can move the limit inside of it. So if you already know $lim_{ntoinfty}sqrt[n]n=1$ then that's a full proof.
This answer is insufficient. It is not enough to state that the exponent is constant. An essential property is missing.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 10:06
@YvesDaoust Raising to the power of a constant is continuous around $1$?
– Arthur
Nov 22 at 10:46
This is precisely the missing property. By the way, even a variable exponent would yield a continuous function.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 14:37
@YvesDaoust Sure you can do it with a variable exponent as well, but then you have to be extra careful. You can't put the limit inside of, say, $sqrt[n]{n}^n$ and expect to get a sensible answer. You need a constant exponent for that (or at least an exponent converging to a nice value). And I could argue for this without continuity of exponentiation at all. Just using that $sqrt[n]{n}^3 = sqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}$, and you can take the limits of those separately (something which is usually proven quite early and taken as implicit).
– Arthur
Nov 22 at 14:40
What I mean is that "since the exponent $^3$ is constant" is not the reason.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 15:00
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Yes, we can simply do that. Since the exponent $^3$ is a constant neutral number (meaning we may interpret it as a fixed number of multiplications) we can move the limit inside of it. So if you already know $lim_{ntoinfty}sqrt[n]n=1$ then that's a full proof.
Yes, we can simply do that. Since the exponent $^3$ is a constant neutral number (meaning we may interpret it as a fixed number of multiplications) we can move the limit inside of it. So if you already know $lim_{ntoinfty}sqrt[n]n=1$ then that's a full proof.
edited Nov 22 at 15:13
answered Nov 21 at 21:08
Arthur
110k7104186
110k7104186
This answer is insufficient. It is not enough to state that the exponent is constant. An essential property is missing.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 10:06
@YvesDaoust Raising to the power of a constant is continuous around $1$?
– Arthur
Nov 22 at 10:46
This is precisely the missing property. By the way, even a variable exponent would yield a continuous function.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 14:37
@YvesDaoust Sure you can do it with a variable exponent as well, but then you have to be extra careful. You can't put the limit inside of, say, $sqrt[n]{n}^n$ and expect to get a sensible answer. You need a constant exponent for that (or at least an exponent converging to a nice value). And I could argue for this without continuity of exponentiation at all. Just using that $sqrt[n]{n}^3 = sqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}$, and you can take the limits of those separately (something which is usually proven quite early and taken as implicit).
– Arthur
Nov 22 at 14:40
What I mean is that "since the exponent $^3$ is constant" is not the reason.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 15:00
|
show 2 more comments
This answer is insufficient. It is not enough to state that the exponent is constant. An essential property is missing.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 10:06
@YvesDaoust Raising to the power of a constant is continuous around $1$?
– Arthur
Nov 22 at 10:46
This is precisely the missing property. By the way, even a variable exponent would yield a continuous function.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 14:37
@YvesDaoust Sure you can do it with a variable exponent as well, but then you have to be extra careful. You can't put the limit inside of, say, $sqrt[n]{n}^n$ and expect to get a sensible answer. You need a constant exponent for that (or at least an exponent converging to a nice value). And I could argue for this without continuity of exponentiation at all. Just using that $sqrt[n]{n}^3 = sqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}$, and you can take the limits of those separately (something which is usually proven quite early and taken as implicit).
– Arthur
Nov 22 at 14:40
What I mean is that "since the exponent $^3$ is constant" is not the reason.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 15:00
This answer is insufficient. It is not enough to state that the exponent is constant. An essential property is missing.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 10:06
This answer is insufficient. It is not enough to state that the exponent is constant. An essential property is missing.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 10:06
@YvesDaoust Raising to the power of a constant is continuous around $1$?
– Arthur
Nov 22 at 10:46
@YvesDaoust Raising to the power of a constant is continuous around $1$?
– Arthur
Nov 22 at 10:46
This is precisely the missing property. By the way, even a variable exponent would yield a continuous function.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 14:37
This is precisely the missing property. By the way, even a variable exponent would yield a continuous function.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 14:37
@YvesDaoust Sure you can do it with a variable exponent as well, but then you have to be extra careful. You can't put the limit inside of, say, $sqrt[n]{n}^n$ and expect to get a sensible answer. You need a constant exponent for that (or at least an exponent converging to a nice value). And I could argue for this without continuity of exponentiation at all. Just using that $sqrt[n]{n}^3 = sqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}$, and you can take the limits of those separately (something which is usually proven quite early and taken as implicit).
– Arthur
Nov 22 at 14:40
@YvesDaoust Sure you can do it with a variable exponent as well, but then you have to be extra careful. You can't put the limit inside of, say, $sqrt[n]{n}^n$ and expect to get a sensible answer. You need a constant exponent for that (or at least an exponent converging to a nice value). And I could argue for this without continuity of exponentiation at all. Just using that $sqrt[n]{n}^3 = sqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}$, and you can take the limits of those separately (something which is usually proven quite early and taken as implicit).
– Arthur
Nov 22 at 14:40
What I mean is that "since the exponent $^3$ is constant" is not the reason.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 15:00
What I mean is that "since the exponent $^3$ is constant" is not the reason.
– Yves Daoust
Nov 22 at 15:00
|
show 2 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
Yes we are allowed to do that since for continuity
$$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)=Lin mathbb{R} implies lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)]^k=left[lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)right]^k=L^k$$
Indeed in that particular case since $sqrt[n]{n}to 1$
$$forall epsilon>0 quad exists bar n quad forall n>bar n quad |sqrt[n]{n}-1|<epsilon$$
we have that, assuming $sqrt[n]{n}<2$, $forall bar epsilon=7epsilon>0$
$$|(sqrt[n]{n})^3-1|=|sqrt[n]{n}-1|cdot |sqrt[n]{n^2}+sqrt[n]{n}+1|< 7epsilon=bar epsilon quad forall n>bar n$$
and then $(sqrt[n]{n})^3to 1$.
1
You would need this to be an "if and only if" for this to apply here.
– Will Sherwood
Nov 21 at 21:15
@WillSherwood Yes but in that case the asker was interested in that particular implication. Do you think that this is the motivation for the downvoting? Thanks
– gimusi
Nov 21 at 21:24
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
Yes we are allowed to do that since for continuity
$$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)=Lin mathbb{R} implies lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)]^k=left[lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)right]^k=L^k$$
Indeed in that particular case since $sqrt[n]{n}to 1$
$$forall epsilon>0 quad exists bar n quad forall n>bar n quad |sqrt[n]{n}-1|<epsilon$$
we have that, assuming $sqrt[n]{n}<2$, $forall bar epsilon=7epsilon>0$
$$|(sqrt[n]{n})^3-1|=|sqrt[n]{n}-1|cdot |sqrt[n]{n^2}+sqrt[n]{n}+1|< 7epsilon=bar epsilon quad forall n>bar n$$
and then $(sqrt[n]{n})^3to 1$.
1
You would need this to be an "if and only if" for this to apply here.
– Will Sherwood
Nov 21 at 21:15
@WillSherwood Yes but in that case the asker was interested in that particular implication. Do you think that this is the motivation for the downvoting? Thanks
– gimusi
Nov 21 at 21:24
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
Yes we are allowed to do that since for continuity
$$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)=Lin mathbb{R} implies lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)]^k=left[lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)right]^k=L^k$$
Indeed in that particular case since $sqrt[n]{n}to 1$
$$forall epsilon>0 quad exists bar n quad forall n>bar n quad |sqrt[n]{n}-1|<epsilon$$
we have that, assuming $sqrt[n]{n}<2$, $forall bar epsilon=7epsilon>0$
$$|(sqrt[n]{n})^3-1|=|sqrt[n]{n}-1|cdot |sqrt[n]{n^2}+sqrt[n]{n}+1|< 7epsilon=bar epsilon quad forall n>bar n$$
and then $(sqrt[n]{n})^3to 1$.
Yes we are allowed to do that since for continuity
$$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)=Lin mathbb{R} implies lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)]^k=left[lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)right]^k=L^k$$
Indeed in that particular case since $sqrt[n]{n}to 1$
$$forall epsilon>0 quad exists bar n quad forall n>bar n quad |sqrt[n]{n}-1|<epsilon$$
we have that, assuming $sqrt[n]{n}<2$, $forall bar epsilon=7epsilon>0$
$$|(sqrt[n]{n})^3-1|=|sqrt[n]{n}-1|cdot |sqrt[n]{n^2}+sqrt[n]{n}+1|< 7epsilon=bar epsilon quad forall n>bar n$$
and then $(sqrt[n]{n})^3to 1$.
edited Nov 21 at 21:36
answered Nov 21 at 21:10
gimusi
91.7k84495
91.7k84495
1
You would need this to be an "if and only if" for this to apply here.
– Will Sherwood
Nov 21 at 21:15
@WillSherwood Yes but in that case the asker was interested in that particular implication. Do you think that this is the motivation for the downvoting? Thanks
– gimusi
Nov 21 at 21:24
add a comment |
1
You would need this to be an "if and only if" for this to apply here.
– Will Sherwood
Nov 21 at 21:15
@WillSherwood Yes but in that case the asker was interested in that particular implication. Do you think that this is the motivation for the downvoting? Thanks
– gimusi
Nov 21 at 21:24
1
1
You would need this to be an "if and only if" for this to apply here.
– Will Sherwood
Nov 21 at 21:15
You would need this to be an "if and only if" for this to apply here.
– Will Sherwood
Nov 21 at 21:15
@WillSherwood Yes but in that case the asker was interested in that particular implication. Do you think that this is the motivation for the downvoting? Thanks
– gimusi
Nov 21 at 21:24
@WillSherwood Yes but in that case the asker was interested in that particular implication. Do you think that this is the motivation for the downvoting? Thanks
– gimusi
Nov 21 at 21:24
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
You know that
$sqrt[n]{n}
to 1$.
Also
$sqrt[n]{n^k}
=(sqrt[n]{n})^k
$
so
$begin{array}\
sqrt[n]{n^k}-1
&=(sqrt[n]{n})^k-1\
&=(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j\
text{so}\
|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)||sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^n|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |n|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|kn\
end{array}
$
Therefore,
to make
$|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
le epsilon$,
choose $n$ large enough
so that
$|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|
le frac{epsilon}{kn}
$.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
You know that
$sqrt[n]{n}
to 1$.
Also
$sqrt[n]{n^k}
=(sqrt[n]{n})^k
$
so
$begin{array}\
sqrt[n]{n^k}-1
&=(sqrt[n]{n})^k-1\
&=(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j\
text{so}\
|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)||sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^n|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |n|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|kn\
end{array}
$
Therefore,
to make
$|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
le epsilon$,
choose $n$ large enough
so that
$|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|
le frac{epsilon}{kn}
$.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
You know that
$sqrt[n]{n}
to 1$.
Also
$sqrt[n]{n^k}
=(sqrt[n]{n})^k
$
so
$begin{array}\
sqrt[n]{n^k}-1
&=(sqrt[n]{n})^k-1\
&=(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j\
text{so}\
|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)||sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^n|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |n|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|kn\
end{array}
$
Therefore,
to make
$|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
le epsilon$,
choose $n$ large enough
so that
$|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|
le frac{epsilon}{kn}
$.
You know that
$sqrt[n]{n}
to 1$.
Also
$sqrt[n]{n^k}
=(sqrt[n]{n})^k
$
so
$begin{array}\
sqrt[n]{n^k}-1
&=(sqrt[n]{n})^k-1\
&=(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j\
text{so}\
|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)||sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^n|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |n|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|kn\
end{array}
$
Therefore,
to make
$|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
le epsilon$,
choose $n$ large enough
so that
$|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|
le frac{epsilon}{kn}
$.
answered Nov 21 at 22:02
marty cohen
71.7k546124
71.7k546124
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
You can if you know four things.
1) If $f$ is continuous and $a_n to M$ and for all $a_n$ that $f(a_n)$ is defined and $f(M)$ is defined then $a_nto M$ means $f(a_n) to f(M)$.
But you DO have to prove this sometime. I'm sure your text has proven that somewhere.
And
2) you need to know that $sqrt[n]{n} to 1$.
But you claim you have already shown that.
And 3) that $sqrt[n]{n^3} = (sqrt[n]{n})^3$.
Which is basic. It follows that as for all $M > 0$ and $nin mathbb N$ there is a unique $k = sqrt[n]{M}$ so that $k^n = M$. And as $(k^j)^n= (k^n)^j = M^j; for j in mathbb N$ it follows that $(sqrt[n]{M})^j= sqrt[n]{M^3}$.
And finally you need to know 4) that $()^3: mathbb R to mathbb R$ is continuous.
Which is .... basic. But you should have proven that sometime.
So $lim sqrt[n]{n^3} = lim (sqrt[n]{n})^3 = (lim sqrt[n]{n})^3 = 1^3 =1$.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
You can if you know four things.
1) If $f$ is continuous and $a_n to M$ and for all $a_n$ that $f(a_n)$ is defined and $f(M)$ is defined then $a_nto M$ means $f(a_n) to f(M)$.
But you DO have to prove this sometime. I'm sure your text has proven that somewhere.
And
2) you need to know that $sqrt[n]{n} to 1$.
But you claim you have already shown that.
And 3) that $sqrt[n]{n^3} = (sqrt[n]{n})^3$.
Which is basic. It follows that as for all $M > 0$ and $nin mathbb N$ there is a unique $k = sqrt[n]{M}$ so that $k^n = M$. And as $(k^j)^n= (k^n)^j = M^j; for j in mathbb N$ it follows that $(sqrt[n]{M})^j= sqrt[n]{M^3}$.
And finally you need to know 4) that $()^3: mathbb R to mathbb R$ is continuous.
Which is .... basic. But you should have proven that sometime.
So $lim sqrt[n]{n^3} = lim (sqrt[n]{n})^3 = (lim sqrt[n]{n})^3 = 1^3 =1$.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
You can if you know four things.
1) If $f$ is continuous and $a_n to M$ and for all $a_n$ that $f(a_n)$ is defined and $f(M)$ is defined then $a_nto M$ means $f(a_n) to f(M)$.
But you DO have to prove this sometime. I'm sure your text has proven that somewhere.
And
2) you need to know that $sqrt[n]{n} to 1$.
But you claim you have already shown that.
And 3) that $sqrt[n]{n^3} = (sqrt[n]{n})^3$.
Which is basic. It follows that as for all $M > 0$ and $nin mathbb N$ there is a unique $k = sqrt[n]{M}$ so that $k^n = M$. And as $(k^j)^n= (k^n)^j = M^j; for j in mathbb N$ it follows that $(sqrt[n]{M})^j= sqrt[n]{M^3}$.
And finally you need to know 4) that $()^3: mathbb R to mathbb R$ is continuous.
Which is .... basic. But you should have proven that sometime.
So $lim sqrt[n]{n^3} = lim (sqrt[n]{n})^3 = (lim sqrt[n]{n})^3 = 1^3 =1$.
You can if you know four things.
1) If $f$ is continuous and $a_n to M$ and for all $a_n$ that $f(a_n)$ is defined and $f(M)$ is defined then $a_nto M$ means $f(a_n) to f(M)$.
But you DO have to prove this sometime. I'm sure your text has proven that somewhere.
And
2) you need to know that $sqrt[n]{n} to 1$.
But you claim you have already shown that.
And 3) that $sqrt[n]{n^3} = (sqrt[n]{n})^3$.
Which is basic. It follows that as for all $M > 0$ and $nin mathbb N$ there is a unique $k = sqrt[n]{M}$ so that $k^n = M$. And as $(k^j)^n= (k^n)^j = M^j; for j in mathbb N$ it follows that $(sqrt[n]{M})^j= sqrt[n]{M^3}$.
And finally you need to know 4) that $()^3: mathbb R to mathbb R$ is continuous.
Which is .... basic. But you should have proven that sometime.
So $lim sqrt[n]{n^3} = lim (sqrt[n]{n})^3 = (lim sqrt[n]{n})^3 = 1^3 =1$.
answered Nov 21 at 22:18
fleablood
67.4k22684
67.4k22684
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
Yes, because the cubic root function is continuous, so that you can swap the limit and the root.
Continuity at $1$ is ensured by the fact that
$$|sqrt[3]{1+delta}-1|=left|frac{delta}{(sqrt[3]{1+delta})^2+sqrt[3]{1+delta}+1}right|<fracdelta3<epsilon$$ holds with $delta<3epsilon$.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
Yes, because the cubic root function is continuous, so that you can swap the limit and the root.
Continuity at $1$ is ensured by the fact that
$$|sqrt[3]{1+delta}-1|=left|frac{delta}{(sqrt[3]{1+delta})^2+sqrt[3]{1+delta}+1}right|<fracdelta3<epsilon$$ holds with $delta<3epsilon$.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
Yes, because the cubic root function is continuous, so that you can swap the limit and the root.
Continuity at $1$ is ensured by the fact that
$$|sqrt[3]{1+delta}-1|=left|frac{delta}{(sqrt[3]{1+delta})^2+sqrt[3]{1+delta}+1}right|<fracdelta3<epsilon$$ holds with $delta<3epsilon$.
Yes, because the cubic root function is continuous, so that you can swap the limit and the root.
Continuity at $1$ is ensured by the fact that
$$|sqrt[3]{1+delta}-1|=left|frac{delta}{(sqrt[3]{1+delta})^2+sqrt[3]{1+delta}+1}right|<fracdelta3<epsilon$$ holds with $delta<3epsilon$.
edited Nov 22 at 8:07
answered Nov 21 at 21:52
Yves Daoust
123k668219
123k668219
add a comment |
add a comment |
1
Yes, if you already know $sqrt[n]nto 1$
– Hagen von Eitzen
Nov 21 at 21:08
This is a lemma the book had us prove earlier, also the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
– Wesley Strik
Nov 21 at 21:08
Please include some text in your title besides just mathjax formatting.
– amWhy
Nov 21 at 21:13
Thanks Hagen, I do now that :)
– Wesley Strik
Nov 21 at 21:18
"Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit." Has that been proven? If so... you are good. If not, you must justify it (it is true by the way).
– fleablood
Nov 21 at 22:19