}} {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Wikipedia|{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}|= |
}}|{{error:not substituted|Archive header}}
}}}} {{#if:|
}}
width = "100%" |
colspan="3" align="center" | Mathematics desk |
---|
width="20%" align="left" | < March 18
! width="25%" align="center"|<< Feb | March | Apr >>
! width="20%" align="right" |{{#ifexist:Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Mathematics/2009 March 20|March 20|Current desk}} > |
---|
align=center width=95% style="background: #FFFFFF; border: 1px solid #003EBA;" cellpadding="8" cellspacing="0" |
style="background: #5D7CBA; text-align: center; font-family:Arial; color:#FFFFFF;" | Welcome to the Wikipedia Mathematics Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is {{#ifexist:Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Mathematics/2009 March 29|an archive page|a transcluded archive page}}. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
__TOC__
= March 19 =
== Functional Convergence ==
In a recent thread, if I understand correctly, pma says that converges pointwise to as n approaces infinity. How would you prove that? Black Carrot (talk) 07:53, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
:Won't the limit depend on what branch of log you choose for negative arguments? Algebraist 10:23, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
::My apologies: I made a misprint there (now corrected): the change of variables was , with a minus in the exponent (this is consistent with the line below, that had it). So the term is at the denominator, and the argument of log goes to 1 (actually, in that computation it was always positive). Do you see how to do it now?--pma (talk) 12:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
::Here it is:
:*Write the second order Taylor expansion for at 0, with remainder in Peano form: so, for all
::, as .
:*For any s we only have to consider the integers . Replace in the expansion above, getting
::, as , and uniformly for all .
:*Summing over all
::, as .
:*Then you may observe that is the Riemann sum for the integral of on [0,1] (or use the formula for ) and conclude that the whole thing is .
::Warning: I have re-edited this answer, to make it more simple and clear (hopefully) --pma (talk) 13:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)