How to prove that if $lim a_n = L$ then $lim a_n^r = L^r$











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












I am trying to prove that:




Given that the sequence: $(a_n)_{n=1}^infty$ has a limit $L$ (where $forall n in mathbb N, a_n>0$), the sequence $(a_n^r)_{n=1}^infty$ (where $r>0$, $r in mathbb{R}$) has a limit $L^r$.




I can prove in for instance for $r=frac{1}{2}$:




Given $forall epsilon > 0$ $|a_n-L|<epsilon$, one can show that $forall epsilon >0$, $$|sqrt{a_n}-sqrt{L}|=left|frac{(sqrt{a_n}-sqrt{L})(sqrt{a_n}+sqrt{L})}{(sqrt{a_n}+sqrt{L})}right|=left|frac{a_n-L}{(sqrt{a_n}+sqrt{L})}right|<epsilon.$$




But, I don't know how to make it general.
Is it true that $a_n^r-L^r leq (a_n-L)^r$,
for $a_n$, $L$ and $r$ that satisfy the above requirements?



edit: I have encountered the question in a course in which functions and continuity are thought after sequences, so my intention in the question was to use only sequences (and of course, completeness of reals, the property of Archimedes, real numbers axioms, definition of sequences limits, arithmetic sequences limits etc..)










share|cite|improve this question
























  • You may use the continuity of$e^x$ function....
    – dmtri
    Nov 14 at 10:40










  • Essentially this question: math.stackexchange.com/q/83460 ?
    – user587192
    Nov 14 at 14:03















up vote
1
down vote

favorite












I am trying to prove that:




Given that the sequence: $(a_n)_{n=1}^infty$ has a limit $L$ (where $forall n in mathbb N, a_n>0$), the sequence $(a_n^r)_{n=1}^infty$ (where $r>0$, $r in mathbb{R}$) has a limit $L^r$.




I can prove in for instance for $r=frac{1}{2}$:




Given $forall epsilon > 0$ $|a_n-L|<epsilon$, one can show that $forall epsilon >0$, $$|sqrt{a_n}-sqrt{L}|=left|frac{(sqrt{a_n}-sqrt{L})(sqrt{a_n}+sqrt{L})}{(sqrt{a_n}+sqrt{L})}right|=left|frac{a_n-L}{(sqrt{a_n}+sqrt{L})}right|<epsilon.$$




But, I don't know how to make it general.
Is it true that $a_n^r-L^r leq (a_n-L)^r$,
for $a_n$, $L$ and $r$ that satisfy the above requirements?



edit: I have encountered the question in a course in which functions and continuity are thought after sequences, so my intention in the question was to use only sequences (and of course, completeness of reals, the property of Archimedes, real numbers axioms, definition of sequences limits, arithmetic sequences limits etc..)










share|cite|improve this question
























  • You may use the continuity of$e^x$ function....
    – dmtri
    Nov 14 at 10:40










  • Essentially this question: math.stackexchange.com/q/83460 ?
    – user587192
    Nov 14 at 14:03













up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











I am trying to prove that:




Given that the sequence: $(a_n)_{n=1}^infty$ has a limit $L$ (where $forall n in mathbb N, a_n>0$), the sequence $(a_n^r)_{n=1}^infty$ (where $r>0$, $r in mathbb{R}$) has a limit $L^r$.




I can prove in for instance for $r=frac{1}{2}$:




Given $forall epsilon > 0$ $|a_n-L|<epsilon$, one can show that $forall epsilon >0$, $$|sqrt{a_n}-sqrt{L}|=left|frac{(sqrt{a_n}-sqrt{L})(sqrt{a_n}+sqrt{L})}{(sqrt{a_n}+sqrt{L})}right|=left|frac{a_n-L}{(sqrt{a_n}+sqrt{L})}right|<epsilon.$$




But, I don't know how to make it general.
Is it true that $a_n^r-L^r leq (a_n-L)^r$,
for $a_n$, $L$ and $r$ that satisfy the above requirements?



edit: I have encountered the question in a course in which functions and continuity are thought after sequences, so my intention in the question was to use only sequences (and of course, completeness of reals, the property of Archimedes, real numbers axioms, definition of sequences limits, arithmetic sequences limits etc..)










share|cite|improve this question















I am trying to prove that:




Given that the sequence: $(a_n)_{n=1}^infty$ has a limit $L$ (where $forall n in mathbb N, a_n>0$), the sequence $(a_n^r)_{n=1}^infty$ (where $r>0$, $r in mathbb{R}$) has a limit $L^r$.




I can prove in for instance for $r=frac{1}{2}$:




Given $forall epsilon > 0$ $|a_n-L|<epsilon$, one can show that $forall epsilon >0$, $$|sqrt{a_n}-sqrt{L}|=left|frac{(sqrt{a_n}-sqrt{L})(sqrt{a_n}+sqrt{L})}{(sqrt{a_n}+sqrt{L})}right|=left|frac{a_n-L}{(sqrt{a_n}+sqrt{L})}right|<epsilon.$$




But, I don't know how to make it general.
Is it true that $a_n^r-L^r leq (a_n-L)^r$,
for $a_n$, $L$ and $r$ that satisfy the above requirements?



edit: I have encountered the question in a course in which functions and continuity are thought after sequences, so my intention in the question was to use only sequences (and of course, completeness of reals, the property of Archimedes, real numbers axioms, definition of sequences limits, arithmetic sequences limits etc..)







calculus real-analysis sequences-and-series limits continuity






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 17 at 13:51

























asked Nov 14 at 10:35









user135172

42729




42729












  • You may use the continuity of$e^x$ function....
    – dmtri
    Nov 14 at 10:40










  • Essentially this question: math.stackexchange.com/q/83460 ?
    – user587192
    Nov 14 at 14:03


















  • You may use the continuity of$e^x$ function....
    – dmtri
    Nov 14 at 10:40










  • Essentially this question: math.stackexchange.com/q/83460 ?
    – user587192
    Nov 14 at 14:03
















You may use the continuity of$e^x$ function....
– dmtri
Nov 14 at 10:40




You may use the continuity of$e^x$ function....
– dmtri
Nov 14 at 10:40












Essentially this question: math.stackexchange.com/q/83460 ?
– user587192
Nov 14 at 14:03




Essentially this question: math.stackexchange.com/q/83460 ?
– user587192
Nov 14 at 14:03










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote













We know that a sequence is a function whose domain is natural numbers.Let f be that function, now apply this.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • The meaning is to prove it without using theory of continuous functions.. I encountered this question in a course where functions limits is thought after sequences limits..
    – user135172
    Nov 17 at 13:47


















up vote
0
down vote













What tedium.

Simply prove continuous functions preserve limits.



That is if f:R -> R is continuous and the sequence

a$_n$ -> a, then the sequence f(a$_n$) -> f(a).



To finish, note that for x > 0, x$^r$ is continuous.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • You've pushed the parcel onto a separate question. Why is $x^r$ continuous, and how is it even defined?
    – Umberto P.
    Nov 14 at 14:59










  • The meaning is to prove it without using theory of continuous functions.. I encountered this question in a course where functions limits is thought after sequences limits..
    – user135172
    Nov 17 at 13:46











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%2f2998108%2fhow-to-prove-that-if-lim-a-n-l-then-lim-a-nr-lr%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
1
down vote













We know that a sequence is a function whose domain is natural numbers.Let f be that function, now apply this.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • The meaning is to prove it without using theory of continuous functions.. I encountered this question in a course where functions limits is thought after sequences limits..
    – user135172
    Nov 17 at 13:47















up vote
1
down vote













We know that a sequence is a function whose domain is natural numbers.Let f be that function, now apply this.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • The meaning is to prove it without using theory of continuous functions.. I encountered this question in a course where functions limits is thought after sequences limits..
    – user135172
    Nov 17 at 13:47













up vote
1
down vote










up vote
1
down vote









We know that a sequence is a function whose domain is natural numbers.Let f be that function, now apply this.






share|cite|improve this answer












We know that a sequence is a function whose domain is natural numbers.Let f be that function, now apply this.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Nov 14 at 11:04









Crazy for maths

4948




4948












  • The meaning is to prove it without using theory of continuous functions.. I encountered this question in a course where functions limits is thought after sequences limits..
    – user135172
    Nov 17 at 13:47


















  • The meaning is to prove it without using theory of continuous functions.. I encountered this question in a course where functions limits is thought after sequences limits..
    – user135172
    Nov 17 at 13:47
















The meaning is to prove it without using theory of continuous functions.. I encountered this question in a course where functions limits is thought after sequences limits..
– user135172
Nov 17 at 13:47




The meaning is to prove it without using theory of continuous functions.. I encountered this question in a course where functions limits is thought after sequences limits..
– user135172
Nov 17 at 13:47










up vote
0
down vote













What tedium.

Simply prove continuous functions preserve limits.



That is if f:R -> R is continuous and the sequence

a$_n$ -> a, then the sequence f(a$_n$) -> f(a).



To finish, note that for x > 0, x$^r$ is continuous.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • You've pushed the parcel onto a separate question. Why is $x^r$ continuous, and how is it even defined?
    – Umberto P.
    Nov 14 at 14:59










  • The meaning is to prove it without using theory of continuous functions.. I encountered this question in a course where functions limits is thought after sequences limits..
    – user135172
    Nov 17 at 13:46















up vote
0
down vote













What tedium.

Simply prove continuous functions preserve limits.



That is if f:R -> R is continuous and the sequence

a$_n$ -> a, then the sequence f(a$_n$) -> f(a).



To finish, note that for x > 0, x$^r$ is continuous.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • You've pushed the parcel onto a separate question. Why is $x^r$ continuous, and how is it even defined?
    – Umberto P.
    Nov 14 at 14:59










  • The meaning is to prove it without using theory of continuous functions.. I encountered this question in a course where functions limits is thought after sequences limits..
    – user135172
    Nov 17 at 13:46













up vote
0
down vote










up vote
0
down vote









What tedium.

Simply prove continuous functions preserve limits.



That is if f:R -> R is continuous and the sequence

a$_n$ -> a, then the sequence f(a$_n$) -> f(a).



To finish, note that for x > 0, x$^r$ is continuous.






share|cite|improve this answer












What tedium.

Simply prove continuous functions preserve limits.



That is if f:R -> R is continuous and the sequence

a$_n$ -> a, then the sequence f(a$_n$) -> f(a).



To finish, note that for x > 0, x$^r$ is continuous.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Nov 14 at 11:07









William Elliot

6,7632518




6,7632518












  • You've pushed the parcel onto a separate question. Why is $x^r$ continuous, and how is it even defined?
    – Umberto P.
    Nov 14 at 14:59










  • The meaning is to prove it without using theory of continuous functions.. I encountered this question in a course where functions limits is thought after sequences limits..
    – user135172
    Nov 17 at 13:46


















  • You've pushed the parcel onto a separate question. Why is $x^r$ continuous, and how is it even defined?
    – Umberto P.
    Nov 14 at 14:59










  • The meaning is to prove it without using theory of continuous functions.. I encountered this question in a course where functions limits is thought after sequences limits..
    – user135172
    Nov 17 at 13:46
















You've pushed the parcel onto a separate question. Why is $x^r$ continuous, and how is it even defined?
– Umberto P.
Nov 14 at 14:59




You've pushed the parcel onto a separate question. Why is $x^r$ continuous, and how is it even defined?
– Umberto P.
Nov 14 at 14:59












The meaning is to prove it without using theory of continuous functions.. I encountered this question in a course where functions limits is thought after sequences limits..
– user135172
Nov 17 at 13:46




The meaning is to prove it without using theory of continuous functions.. I encountered this question in a course where functions limits is thought after sequences limits..
– user135172
Nov 17 at 13:46


















 

draft saved


draft discarded



















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2998108%2fhow-to-prove-that-if-lim-a-n-l-then-lim-a-nr-lr%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

Brian Clough

Cáceres