Open study

is now brainly

With Brainly you can:

  • Get homework help from millions of students and moderators
  • Learn how to solve problems with step-by-step explanations
  • Share your knowledge and earn points by helping other students
  • Learn anywhere, anytime with the Brainly app!

A community for students.

limits. How do I show that \[\lim_{k\to\infty} \frac{(-1)^k}{k}=0\]

I got my questions answered at in under 10 minutes. Go to now for free help!
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


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

Do you know LH rule ?? Where you can differentiate the numerator and denominator.
sorry I keep messing up the latex and openstudy is so slow.
and yeah I know lh rule could be applied since \(k\in\mathbb{R}\). But how does that help?

Not the answer you are looking for?

Search for more explanations.

Ask your own question

Other answers:

Okay since it is (-1) , LH rule won't be applied.
hmm, so, think like this : (-1)^n , where n is any natural number, will always be equal to +1 or -1 right ?
agreed. and since \(k\to\infty\) I can see that it's 0. just not sure how to show that in any sort of rigorous way.
I need to show it though to show that a series is convergent.
hmm, Am not too comfortable with that. @phi
  • phi
I thought the definition of a limit L is that for any \( \epsilon >0\), there exists an integer N>0 such that \( | L - x_n| < \epsilon \) for all n>N the alternating sign does not affect this definition, because you are only looking at the distance away from L. (0 in this case)

Not the answer you are looking for?

Search for more explanations.

Ask your own question