Problem 1 is Exercise 7.7.64 from the book. It asks to determine the convergence of

There are several ways of approaching this problem.

Method 1: Begin by noting that

and so

can be evaluated by using the substitution so which transforms the integral into

that can be solved with the trig. substitution so and

Now we return to the problem:

We have found the value of the integral, so in particular, it converges.

Method 2: First,

We use comparison for both and

If Since

we have by comparison that is finite.

If Since

we have by comparison that is also finite.

Hence, converges.

Method 3: As before,

The change of variables transforms into

and

which of course is the same as

So all we need to do is to show that converges, and for this we can use comparison, because

and

Problem 2 is an easier version of Exercise 7.7.63 from the book. It asks to determine the convergence of

The problem here is that we cannot find so we are forced to use comparison. A natural thing to try would be to compare with

Since we have

The problem is that has an asymptote at 0. However, we can split the integral as

The first integral is finite, simply because it is the integral of a continuous function on some finite interval, there is nothing improper here. The second converges by comparison with the -integral with

It follows that the whole integral converges.

A slightly different approach is to use limit comparison rather than direct comparison:

It follows that converges because does; and we have to treat

as above. We cannot just compare with (which happens to diverge), because the limit comparison test requires that the functions that we compare are continuous, and is not continuous at 0.

Typeset using LaTeX2WP. Here is a printable version of this post.

This entry was posted on Friday, November 13th, 2009 at 2:32 pm and is filed under 175: Calculus II. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Georgii: Let me start with some brief remarks. In a series of three papers: a. Wacław Sierpiński, "Contribution à la théorie des séries divergentes", Comp. Rend. Soc. Sci. Varsovie 3 (1910) 89–93 (in Polish). b. Wacław Sierpiński, "Remarque sur la théorème de Riemann relatif aux séries semi-convergentes", Prac. Mat. Fiz. XXI (1910) 17–20 […]

It is not possible to provide an explicit expression for a non-linear solution. The reason is that (it is a folklore result that) an additive $f:{\mathbb R}\to{\mathbb R}$ is linear iff it is measurable. (This result can be found in a variety of places, it is a standard exercise in measure theory books. As of this writing, there is a short proof here (Intern […]

Stefan, "low" cardinalities do not change by passing from $L({\mathbb R})$ to $L({\mathbb R})[{\mathcal U}]$, so the answer to the second question is that the existence of a nonprincipal ultrafilter does not imply the existence of a Vitali set. More precisely: Assume determinacy in $L({\mathbb R})$. Then $2^\omega/E_0$ is a successor cardinal to ${ […]

Marginalia to a theorem of Silver (see also this link) by Keith I. Devlin and R. B. Jensen, 1975. A humble title and yet, undoubtedly, one of the most important papers of all time in set theory.

Given a positive integer $a$, the Ramsey number $R(a)$ is the least $n$ such that whenever the edges of the complete graph $K_n$ are colored using only two colors, we necessarily have a copy of $K_a$ with all its edges of the same color. For example, $R(3)= 6$, which is usually stated by saying that in a party of 6 people, necessarily there are 3 that know e […]

Equality is part of the background (first-order) logic, so it is included, but there is no need to mention it. The situation is the same in many other theories. If you want to work in a language without equality, on the other hand, then this is mentioned explicitly. It is true that from extensionality (and logical axioms), one can prove that two sets are equ […]

$L$ has such a nice canonical structure that one can use it to define a global well-ordering. That is, there is a formula $\phi(u,v)$ that (provably in $\mathsf{ZF}$) well-orders all of $L$, so that its restriction to any specific set $A$ in $L$ is a set well-ordering of $A$. The well-ordering $\varphi$ you are asking about can be obtained as the restriction […]

Gödel sentences are by construction $\Pi^0_1$ statements, that is, they have the form "for all $n$ ...", where ... is a recursive statement (think "a statement that a computer can decide"). For instance, the typical Gödel sentence for a system $T$ coming from the second incompleteness theorem says that "for all $n$ that code a proof […]

When I first saw the question, I remembered there was a proof on MO using Ramsey theory, but couldn't remember how the argument went, so I came up with the following, that I first posted as a comment: A cute proof using Schur's theorem: Fix $a$ in your semigroup $S$, and color $n$ and $m$ with the same color whenever $a^n=a^m$. By Schur's theo […]

It depends on what you are doing. I assume by lower level you really mean high level, or general, or 2-digit class. In that case, 54 is general topology, 26 is real functions, 03 is mathematical logic and foundations. "Point-set topology" most likely refers to the stuff in 54, or to the theory of Baire functions, as in 26A21, or to descriptive set […]