Ace school

with brainly

  • Get help from millions of students
  • Learn from experts with step-by-step explanations
  • Level-up by helping others

A community for students.

is this absolutely convergent or conditionally or divergent?

Mathematics
See more answers at brainly.com
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.

Get this expert

answer on brainly

SEE EXPERT ANSWER

Get your free account and access expert answers to this and thousands of other questions

\[\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (-1)^{n}\times e ^{\frac{ 1 }{ n }}\]
Divergent...
yes that's the answer given, but i got conditionally throughout the process can u go thru the steps with me?

Not the answer you are looking for?

Search for more explanations.

Ask your own question

Other answers:

Well, for some large \(n\), \(e^{1/n}\) is sufficiently close to \(1\) so that we can compare this series to the divergent series:\[\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^n\]The larger the \(n\), the closer your series is to this series. Therefore your series diverges. Do you understand why \(\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^n\) diverges?
but, i thought n=1 under the sigma sign...
No, tiffany they are telling right here, it is diverges
we have abs(\[(-1)^{n}\times e ^{1/n}\]) -> 1 when \[n \rightarrow \infty\] but if consider \[a_{n}\] = \[(-1)^{n}\times e ^{1/n}\] , then |\[a_{2n}\] - \[a_{2n+1}\]| > 1 with every n > some N it is diverges
yeah, what i meant was i know it is divergent, but when i go thru the steps i got conditionally convergence
don't understand this part an = (−1)n×e1/n , then | a2n - a2n+1 | > 1 with every n > some N it is diverges
i mean, for example, let N = 1000000, then for every n > N, |a_2n - a_(2n+1)| > 1
Jeanlouie I haven't this type calc for a while since High School, in order for this to be diverges it means the n is closer to 1 or I am lost here?
for the ratio test if the lim is <1 then the series converges, if lim >1 or=infinity the series diverges, if lim=1 inconclusive
i know that testing the series for absolutely convergent or conditionally or divergent is to try the ratio test with absolute value first then the one without.
but when i calculate the one with absolute value the limit =1 so inconclusive; when i test the series for the ratio test without absolute value the limit =-1, so it's convergent; that's how i get conditionally convergent.
although i know i'm wrong, cause the answer is divergent:(
what is the value {1} of this when testing ratio =
when testing ratio without the absolute value i got -1
How does the value change to -1 I am lost there?
1 is only an example here, 0.5 or any other \[\epsilon < -2\] is OK, too. when \[n \rightarrow \infty \], \[a_{2n} \rightarrow 1\] and \[a_{2n+1}\rightarrow -1\] ps:sr for my poor English
ϵ< 2, sorry
\[\rho = \lim_{n \rightarrow +\infty} \frac{ (-1)^{n+1} \times e ^{\frac{ 1 }{ n }}}{ ((-1)^{n})\times e ^{\frac{ 1 }{ n }}\ }\]
ln both top and bottom
yeah, ρ = -1, you got it
becomes:\[\lim_{n \rightarrow +\infty} -\frac{ \frac{ 1 }{ n+1} }{ \frac{ 1 }{ n } } \]
no, top or bottom may be negative, we can't use ln here.
(the limit is still there but i'm just lazy: then: -n/(n+1) divide top and bottom with n: -1/(1+1/n) substitute infinity: -1/(1+0) =-1
Tiffany I think you have the right answer.
i do? but this is like conditionally ; yet the modal answer is divergent...
Tiffany 1+1n is not -1 it is 2n
model, sry
2/n not -1
you see where this is?
in -1/(1+1/n), if i substitute n as infinity, then 1/infinity is 0, so -1/(1+0)=-1/1
is this correct?
when sub in n, you still have 1+1 which is 2.
where does the 1+1 com from?
so if we look at this -1(1+1/n) would give you add the two ones which would 2/n times that by -1 and what is the answer?
so sorry, it should be -1/(1+(1/n)) not -1/(1+1/n)
-1/1=-1times +1 =-1/n
\[\lim_{n \rightarrow +\infty}\frac{ -1 }{ 1+\frac{ 1 }{ n } }\]
yes..
so... \[\lim_{n \rightarrow +\infty} \frac{ -1 }{ 1+\frac{ 1 }{ n } }\]
Tiffany can the bottom be 0? or am I missing something here?
the bottom can't be zero, what i did is just divide top and bottom with n
and then: \[\frac{ -1 }{ 1+\frac{ 1 }{ \infty } }\]
and since \[\frac{ 1 }{ \infty }=0\],
\[\frac{ -1 }{ 1+0 }=-1\]
and i did this like 5 times and still don't get why it's divergent...
T.T
what happens if we -1/1+0=-1 now what if simply the bottom to -1/1=-1 than what?
if it's -1 then the series is convergent, not divergent.
yes..
well, the model answer IS divergent.
only if stays at one, -1=-1 if you add one you get 0
and that's what frustrates me the most.
ok...
so I am taking the answer can't be 0 for the final answer?
no, it's not that it can't be 0, just that how do u suddenly +1 after the limit?
Because the +1 falls within the limit.
oh, ok, thx, i think i get it now. :)
welcome ...
sry for bothering you so long...

Not the answer you are looking for?

Search for more explanations.

Ask your own question