Attempt at sequence proof $frac{n+3}{n^2 -3}$ converges to $0$











up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1













Prove convergence of the following sequence: $$frac{n+3}{n^2 -3} rightarrow 0$$




Proof discussion:



Notice that since whenever $n>3$, we have $n^2 -3 >0$, we also know that $n+3 >0$, so $frac{n+3}{n^2 -3}>0$. This means we can drop the absolute value signs in:
$$ left|frac{n+3}{n^2 -3}-0right|=frac{n+3}{n^2 -3} $$
We now notice that for $n>3$ also $n^2 -9>0$ and $n^2 -3 > n^2 -9$ so $frac{1}{n^2 -3}< frac{1}{n^2 -9}$ we can thus write:
$$frac{n+3}{n^2 -3}<frac{n+3}{n^2 -9}=frac{(n+3)}{(n+3)(n-3)}=frac{1}{n-3} $$



To be able to complete this proof we want that $frac{1}{n-3}<epsilon$, we write $n-3>frac{1}{epsilon}$ or $n> frac{1}{epsilon} +3$. If we pick $n_0 =lceilfrac{1}{epsilon} +3rceil$, it will also be automatically larger than $3$. We can now write our proof:



Proof:
For all $epsilon>0$, we let $n_0=lceil{frac{1}{epsilon}+3 }rceil$ then for all $n>n_0$, we know that:



$$|a_n-0|=left|frac{n+3}{n^2-3} right|<frac{n+3}{n^2-9}=frac{1}{n-3}< frac{1}{frac{1}{epsilon}+3-3}=epsilon$$
And hence our sequence converges to $0$ $square$.



Is my proof okay?










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 1




    I think you should make explicit that since $epsilon>0$, then $n_0geq 4$, so the denominator in $leftlvertfrac{n+3}{n^2-3}rightrvert$ is positive, so you can remove the absolute value sign. Otherwise, I think the proof is perfect.
    – YiFan
    Nov 16 at 7:16






  • 1




    Yes, perfect! Just another small mistake: twice you wrote $epsilon$ instead of $1/epsilon$. I guess it was just a type since you continued correctly.
    – maxmilgram
    Nov 16 at 7:17










  • I do make the case that the denominator is positive, It's in the first line.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:02










  • Maybe I should say it explicitly.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:03















up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1













Prove convergence of the following sequence: $$frac{n+3}{n^2 -3} rightarrow 0$$




Proof discussion:



Notice that since whenever $n>3$, we have $n^2 -3 >0$, we also know that $n+3 >0$, so $frac{n+3}{n^2 -3}>0$. This means we can drop the absolute value signs in:
$$ left|frac{n+3}{n^2 -3}-0right|=frac{n+3}{n^2 -3} $$
We now notice that for $n>3$ also $n^2 -9>0$ and $n^2 -3 > n^2 -9$ so $frac{1}{n^2 -3}< frac{1}{n^2 -9}$ we can thus write:
$$frac{n+3}{n^2 -3}<frac{n+3}{n^2 -9}=frac{(n+3)}{(n+3)(n-3)}=frac{1}{n-3} $$



To be able to complete this proof we want that $frac{1}{n-3}<epsilon$, we write $n-3>frac{1}{epsilon}$ or $n> frac{1}{epsilon} +3$. If we pick $n_0 =lceilfrac{1}{epsilon} +3rceil$, it will also be automatically larger than $3$. We can now write our proof:



Proof:
For all $epsilon>0$, we let $n_0=lceil{frac{1}{epsilon}+3 }rceil$ then for all $n>n_0$, we know that:



$$|a_n-0|=left|frac{n+3}{n^2-3} right|<frac{n+3}{n^2-9}=frac{1}{n-3}< frac{1}{frac{1}{epsilon}+3-3}=epsilon$$
And hence our sequence converges to $0$ $square$.



Is my proof okay?










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 1




    I think you should make explicit that since $epsilon>0$, then $n_0geq 4$, so the denominator in $leftlvertfrac{n+3}{n^2-3}rightrvert$ is positive, so you can remove the absolute value sign. Otherwise, I think the proof is perfect.
    – YiFan
    Nov 16 at 7:16






  • 1




    Yes, perfect! Just another small mistake: twice you wrote $epsilon$ instead of $1/epsilon$. I guess it was just a type since you continued correctly.
    – maxmilgram
    Nov 16 at 7:17










  • I do make the case that the denominator is positive, It's in the first line.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:02










  • Maybe I should say it explicitly.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:03













up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1






1






Prove convergence of the following sequence: $$frac{n+3}{n^2 -3} rightarrow 0$$




Proof discussion:



Notice that since whenever $n>3$, we have $n^2 -3 >0$, we also know that $n+3 >0$, so $frac{n+3}{n^2 -3}>0$. This means we can drop the absolute value signs in:
$$ left|frac{n+3}{n^2 -3}-0right|=frac{n+3}{n^2 -3} $$
We now notice that for $n>3$ also $n^2 -9>0$ and $n^2 -3 > n^2 -9$ so $frac{1}{n^2 -3}< frac{1}{n^2 -9}$ we can thus write:
$$frac{n+3}{n^2 -3}<frac{n+3}{n^2 -9}=frac{(n+3)}{(n+3)(n-3)}=frac{1}{n-3} $$



To be able to complete this proof we want that $frac{1}{n-3}<epsilon$, we write $n-3>frac{1}{epsilon}$ or $n> frac{1}{epsilon} +3$. If we pick $n_0 =lceilfrac{1}{epsilon} +3rceil$, it will also be automatically larger than $3$. We can now write our proof:



Proof:
For all $epsilon>0$, we let $n_0=lceil{frac{1}{epsilon}+3 }rceil$ then for all $n>n_0$, we know that:



$$|a_n-0|=left|frac{n+3}{n^2-3} right|<frac{n+3}{n^2-9}=frac{1}{n-3}< frac{1}{frac{1}{epsilon}+3-3}=epsilon$$
And hence our sequence converges to $0$ $square$.



Is my proof okay?










share|cite|improve this question
















Prove convergence of the following sequence: $$frac{n+3}{n^2 -3} rightarrow 0$$




Proof discussion:



Notice that since whenever $n>3$, we have $n^2 -3 >0$, we also know that $n+3 >0$, so $frac{n+3}{n^2 -3}>0$. This means we can drop the absolute value signs in:
$$ left|frac{n+3}{n^2 -3}-0right|=frac{n+3}{n^2 -3} $$
We now notice that for $n>3$ also $n^2 -9>0$ and $n^2 -3 > n^2 -9$ so $frac{1}{n^2 -3}< frac{1}{n^2 -9}$ we can thus write:
$$frac{n+3}{n^2 -3}<frac{n+3}{n^2 -9}=frac{(n+3)}{(n+3)(n-3)}=frac{1}{n-3} $$



To be able to complete this proof we want that $frac{1}{n-3}<epsilon$, we write $n-3>frac{1}{epsilon}$ or $n> frac{1}{epsilon} +3$. If we pick $n_0 =lceilfrac{1}{epsilon} +3rceil$, it will also be automatically larger than $3$. We can now write our proof:



Proof:
For all $epsilon>0$, we let $n_0=lceil{frac{1}{epsilon}+3 }rceil$ then for all $n>n_0$, we know that:



$$|a_n-0|=left|frac{n+3}{n^2-3} right|<frac{n+3}{n^2-9}=frac{1}{n-3}< frac{1}{frac{1}{epsilon}+3-3}=epsilon$$
And hence our sequence converges to $0$ $square$.



Is my proof okay?







real-analysis sequences-and-series proof-verification epsilon-delta






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 16 at 17:22

























asked Nov 16 at 7:11









WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo

1,064321




1,064321








  • 1




    I think you should make explicit that since $epsilon>0$, then $n_0geq 4$, so the denominator in $leftlvertfrac{n+3}{n^2-3}rightrvert$ is positive, so you can remove the absolute value sign. Otherwise, I think the proof is perfect.
    – YiFan
    Nov 16 at 7:16






  • 1




    Yes, perfect! Just another small mistake: twice you wrote $epsilon$ instead of $1/epsilon$. I guess it was just a type since you continued correctly.
    – maxmilgram
    Nov 16 at 7:17










  • I do make the case that the denominator is positive, It's in the first line.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:02










  • Maybe I should say it explicitly.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:03














  • 1




    I think you should make explicit that since $epsilon>0$, then $n_0geq 4$, so the denominator in $leftlvertfrac{n+3}{n^2-3}rightrvert$ is positive, so you can remove the absolute value sign. Otherwise, I think the proof is perfect.
    – YiFan
    Nov 16 at 7:16






  • 1




    Yes, perfect! Just another small mistake: twice you wrote $epsilon$ instead of $1/epsilon$. I guess it was just a type since you continued correctly.
    – maxmilgram
    Nov 16 at 7:17










  • I do make the case that the denominator is positive, It's in the first line.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:02










  • Maybe I should say it explicitly.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:03








1




1




I think you should make explicit that since $epsilon>0$, then $n_0geq 4$, so the denominator in $leftlvertfrac{n+3}{n^2-3}rightrvert$ is positive, so you can remove the absolute value sign. Otherwise, I think the proof is perfect.
– YiFan
Nov 16 at 7:16




I think you should make explicit that since $epsilon>0$, then $n_0geq 4$, so the denominator in $leftlvertfrac{n+3}{n^2-3}rightrvert$ is positive, so you can remove the absolute value sign. Otherwise, I think the proof is perfect.
– YiFan
Nov 16 at 7:16




1




1




Yes, perfect! Just another small mistake: twice you wrote $epsilon$ instead of $1/epsilon$. I guess it was just a type since you continued correctly.
– maxmilgram
Nov 16 at 7:17




Yes, perfect! Just another small mistake: twice you wrote $epsilon$ instead of $1/epsilon$. I guess it was just a type since you continued correctly.
– maxmilgram
Nov 16 at 7:17












I do make the case that the denominator is positive, It's in the first line.
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 17:02




I do make the case that the denominator is positive, It's in the first line.
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 17:02












Maybe I should say it explicitly.
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 17:03




Maybe I should say it explicitly.
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 17:03










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
2
down vote



accepted










Yup, the proof is correct.



Also, "we write $n-3>color{blue}{frac1{epsilon}}$"






share|cite|improve this answer























  • Why is this an inequality and not an equality? we can just cancel the $n+3$ right?
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 16:58






  • 1




    oops, you are right. I made a mistake.
    – Siong Thye Goh
    Nov 16 at 17:01










  • Thank you. I did do a typo :) you were right about that
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:03








  • 1




    huzzah! I've done it :D
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:14


















up vote
2
down vote













Alternatively, decompose



$$frac{n+3}{n^2-3}=frac1{n-sqrt3}+(3-sqrt3)frac1{n^2-3}$$



and the two terms are of the form $dfrac1infty$.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • That could work later on in the course, right now I am not yet allowed to use this.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:41










  • I realised this is okay since sequences map to $mathbb{R}$, so you can write it in this manner.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:42










  • @WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo: isn't $epsilon$ in $mathbb R$ ?
    – Yves Daoust
    Nov 16 at 17:43










  • Yes, of course :)
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:48











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3000830%2fattempt-at-sequence-proof-fracn3n2-3-converges-to-0%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
2
down vote



accepted










Yup, the proof is correct.



Also, "we write $n-3>color{blue}{frac1{epsilon}}$"






share|cite|improve this answer























  • Why is this an inequality and not an equality? we can just cancel the $n+3$ right?
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 16:58






  • 1




    oops, you are right. I made a mistake.
    – Siong Thye Goh
    Nov 16 at 17:01










  • Thank you. I did do a typo :) you were right about that
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:03








  • 1




    huzzah! I've done it :D
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:14















up vote
2
down vote



accepted










Yup, the proof is correct.



Also, "we write $n-3>color{blue}{frac1{epsilon}}$"






share|cite|improve this answer























  • Why is this an inequality and not an equality? we can just cancel the $n+3$ right?
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 16:58






  • 1




    oops, you are right. I made a mistake.
    – Siong Thye Goh
    Nov 16 at 17:01










  • Thank you. I did do a typo :) you were right about that
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:03








  • 1




    huzzah! I've done it :D
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:14













up vote
2
down vote



accepted







up vote
2
down vote



accepted






Yup, the proof is correct.



Also, "we write $n-3>color{blue}{frac1{epsilon}}$"






share|cite|improve this answer














Yup, the proof is correct.



Also, "we write $n-3>color{blue}{frac1{epsilon}}$"







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Nov 16 at 17:02

























answered Nov 16 at 7:16









Siong Thye Goh

94.9k1462115




94.9k1462115












  • Why is this an inequality and not an equality? we can just cancel the $n+3$ right?
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 16:58






  • 1




    oops, you are right. I made a mistake.
    – Siong Thye Goh
    Nov 16 at 17:01










  • Thank you. I did do a typo :) you were right about that
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:03








  • 1




    huzzah! I've done it :D
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:14


















  • Why is this an inequality and not an equality? we can just cancel the $n+3$ right?
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 16:58






  • 1




    oops, you are right. I made a mistake.
    – Siong Thye Goh
    Nov 16 at 17:01










  • Thank you. I did do a typo :) you were right about that
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:03








  • 1




    huzzah! I've done it :D
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:14
















Why is this an inequality and not an equality? we can just cancel the $n+3$ right?
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 16:58




Why is this an inequality and not an equality? we can just cancel the $n+3$ right?
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 16:58




1




1




oops, you are right. I made a mistake.
– Siong Thye Goh
Nov 16 at 17:01




oops, you are right. I made a mistake.
– Siong Thye Goh
Nov 16 at 17:01












Thank you. I did do a typo :) you were right about that
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 17:03






Thank you. I did do a typo :) you were right about that
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 17:03






1




1




huzzah! I've done it :D
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 17:14




huzzah! I've done it :D
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 17:14










up vote
2
down vote













Alternatively, decompose



$$frac{n+3}{n^2-3}=frac1{n-sqrt3}+(3-sqrt3)frac1{n^2-3}$$



and the two terms are of the form $dfrac1infty$.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • That could work later on in the course, right now I am not yet allowed to use this.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:41










  • I realised this is okay since sequences map to $mathbb{R}$, so you can write it in this manner.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:42










  • @WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo: isn't $epsilon$ in $mathbb R$ ?
    – Yves Daoust
    Nov 16 at 17:43










  • Yes, of course :)
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:48















up vote
2
down vote













Alternatively, decompose



$$frac{n+3}{n^2-3}=frac1{n-sqrt3}+(3-sqrt3)frac1{n^2-3}$$



and the two terms are of the form $dfrac1infty$.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • That could work later on in the course, right now I am not yet allowed to use this.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:41










  • I realised this is okay since sequences map to $mathbb{R}$, so you can write it in this manner.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:42










  • @WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo: isn't $epsilon$ in $mathbb R$ ?
    – Yves Daoust
    Nov 16 at 17:43










  • Yes, of course :)
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:48













up vote
2
down vote










up vote
2
down vote









Alternatively, decompose



$$frac{n+3}{n^2-3}=frac1{n-sqrt3}+(3-sqrt3)frac1{n^2-3}$$



and the two terms are of the form $dfrac1infty$.






share|cite|improve this answer












Alternatively, decompose



$$frac{n+3}{n^2-3}=frac1{n-sqrt3}+(3-sqrt3)frac1{n^2-3}$$



and the two terms are of the form $dfrac1infty$.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Nov 16 at 17:28









Yves Daoust

122k668217




122k668217












  • That could work later on in the course, right now I am not yet allowed to use this.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:41










  • I realised this is okay since sequences map to $mathbb{R}$, so you can write it in this manner.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:42










  • @WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo: isn't $epsilon$ in $mathbb R$ ?
    – Yves Daoust
    Nov 16 at 17:43










  • Yes, of course :)
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:48


















  • That could work later on in the course, right now I am not yet allowed to use this.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:41










  • I realised this is okay since sequences map to $mathbb{R}$, so you can write it in this manner.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:42










  • @WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo: isn't $epsilon$ in $mathbb R$ ?
    – Yves Daoust
    Nov 16 at 17:43










  • Yes, of course :)
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 16 at 17:48
















That could work later on in the course, right now I am not yet allowed to use this.
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 17:41




That could work later on in the course, right now I am not yet allowed to use this.
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 17:41












I realised this is okay since sequences map to $mathbb{R}$, so you can write it in this manner.
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 17:42




I realised this is okay since sequences map to $mathbb{R}$, so you can write it in this manner.
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 17:42












@WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo: isn't $epsilon$ in $mathbb R$ ?
– Yves Daoust
Nov 16 at 17:43




@WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo: isn't $epsilon$ in $mathbb R$ ?
– Yves Daoust
Nov 16 at 17:43












Yes, of course :)
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 17:48




Yes, of course :)
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 16 at 17:48


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3000830%2fattempt-at-sequence-proof-fracn3n2-3-converges-to-0%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Plaza Victoria

In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...