In this lecture we introduce the notion of limit of a
sequence
.
We start from the simple case in which
is a sequence of real numbers, then we deal with the general case in which
can be a sequence of objects that are not necessarily real numbers.
Table of contents
We first give an informal definition and then a more formal definition of the limit of a sequence of real numbers.
Let
be a sequence of real numbers. Let
.
Denote by
a subsequence of
obtained by dropping the first
terms of
,
i.e.,
The
following is an intuitive definition of limit of a sequence.
Definition (informal)
Let
be a real number. We say that
is a limit of a sequence
of real numbers if, by appropriately choosing
,
the distance between
and any term of the subsequence
can be made as close to zero as we like. If
is a limit of the sequence
,
we say that the sequence
is a convergent sequence and that it
converges to
.
We indicate the fact that
is a limit of
by
Thus,
is a limit of
if, by dropping a sufficiently high number of initial terms of
,
we can make the remaining terms of
as close to
as we like. Intuitively,
is a limit of
if
becomes closer and closer to
by letting
go to infinity.
The distance between two real numbers is the absolute value of their
difference. For example, if
and
is a term of a sequence
,
the distance between
and
,
denoted by
,
is
By
using the concept of distance, the above informal definition can be made
rigorous.
Definition (formal)
Let
.
We say that
is a limit of a sequence
of real numbers
if
If
is a limit of the sequence
,
we say that the sequence
is a convergent sequence and that it
converges to
.
We indicate the fact that
is a limit of
by
For those unfamiliar with the universal quantifiers
(any) and
(exists), the notation
reads
as follows: "For any arbitrarily small number
,
there exists a natural number
such that the distance between
and
is less than
for all the terms
with
",
which can also be restated as "For any arbitrarily small number
,
you can find a subsequence
such that the distance between any term of the subsequence and
is less than
"
or as "By dropping a sufficiently high number of initial terms of
,
you can make the remaining terms as close to
as you wish".
It is also possible to prove that a convergent sequence has a unique limit,
i.e., if
has a limit
,
then
is the unique limit of
.
Example
Define a sequence
by characterizing its
-th
element
as
follows:
The
elements of the sequence are
,
,
,
and so on. The higher
is, the smaller
is and the closer it gets to
.
Therefore, intuitively, the limit of the sequence should be
:
It
is straightforward to prove that
is indeed a limit of
by using the above definition. Choose any
.
We need to find an
such that all terms of the subsequence
have distance from zero less than
:
Note
first that the distance between a generic term of the sequence
and
is
where
the last equality obtains from the fact that all the terms of the sequence are
positive (hence they are equal to their absolute values). Therefore, we need
to find an
such that all terms of the subsequence
satisfy
Since
the
condition
is
satisfied if
,
which is equivalent to
.
Therefore, it suffices to pick any
such that
to satisfy the
condition
In
summary, we have just shown that, for any
,
we are able to find
such that all terms of the subsequence
have distance from zero less than
.
As a consequence
is the limit of the sequence
.
We now deal with the more general case in which the terms of the sequence
are not necessarily real numbers. As before, we first give an informal
definition, then a more formal one.
Let
be a set of objects (e.g., real numbers,
events, random
variables) and let
be a sequence of elements of
.
The limit of
is defined as follows.
Definition (informal)
Let
.
We say that
is a limit of a sequence
of elements of
,
if, by appropriately choosing
,
the distance between
and any term of the subsequence
can be made as close to zero as we like. If
is a limit of the sequence
,
we say that the sequence
is a convergent sequence and that it
converges to
.
We indicate the fact that
is a limit of
by
The definition is the same we gave above, except for the fact that now both
and the terms of the sequence
belong to a generic set of objects
.
In the definition above, we have implicitly assumed that the concept of
distance between elements of
is well-defined. Thus, for the above definition to make any sense, we need to
properly define distance.
We need a function
that associates to any couple of elements of
a real number measuring how far these two elements are. For example, if
and
are two elements of
,
needs to be a real number measuring the distance between
and
.
A function
is considered a valid distance function (and it is called a metric on
)
if it satisfies some properties, listed in the next proposition.
Definition
Let
be a set of objects. Let
.
is considered a valid distance function (in which case it is called a
metric on
)
if, for any
,
and
belonging to
:
non-negativity:
;
identity of indiscernibles:
if and only if
;
symmetry:
;
triangle inequality:
.
All four properties are very intuitive: property 1) says that the distance
between two points cannot be a negative number; property 2) says that the
distance between two points is zero if and only if the two points coincide;
property 3) says that the distance from
to
is the same as the distance from
to
;
property 4) says (roughly speaking) that the distance you cover when you go
from
to
directly is less than (or equal to) the distance you cover when you go from
to
passing from a third point
(if
is not on the way from
to
you are increasing the distance covered).
Example (Euclidean
distance)
Consider the set of
-dimensional
real vectors
.
The metric usually employed to measure the distance between elements of
is the so-called Euclidean distance. If
and
are two vectors belonging to
,
then their Euclidean distance
is
where
are the
components of
and
are the
components of
.
It is possible to prove that the Euclidean distance satisfies all the four
properties that a metric needs to satisfy. Furthermore, when
,
it
becomes
which
coincides with the definition of distance between real numbers already given
above.
Whenever we are faced with a sequence of objects and we want to assess whether it is convergent, we need to first define a distance function on the set of objects to which the terms of the sequence belong and verify that the proposed distance function satisfies all the properties of a proper distance function (a metric). For example, in probability theory and statistics, we often deal with sequences of random variables. To assess whether these sequences are convergent, we need to define a metric to measure the distance between two random variables. As we will see in the lecture entitled Sequences of random variables and their convergence, there are several ways of defining the concept of distance between two random variables. All these ways are legitimate and are useful in different situations.
Having defined the concept of a metric, we are now ready to state the formal definition of a limit of a sequence.
Definition (formal)
Let
be a set of objects. Let
be a metric on
.
We say that
is a limit of a sequence
of objects belonging to
if
If
is a limit of the sequence
,
we say that the sequence
is a convergent sequence and that it
converges to
.
We indicate the fact that
is a limit of
by
Also in this case, it is possible to prove (see below) that a convergent
sequence has a unique limit, i.e., if
has a limit
,
then
is the unique limit of
.
The proof is by contradiction. Suppose that
and
are two limits of a sequence
and
.
By combining property 1) and 2) of a metric (see above) it must be
that
i.e.,
where
is a strictly positive constant. Pick any term
of the sequence. By property 4) of a metric (the triangle inequality), we
have
Considering
that
,
the previous inequality
becomes
Now,
take any
.
Since
is a limit of the sequence, we can find
such that
,
which means
that
and
Therefore,
can not be made smaller than
and as a consequence
cannot be a limit of the sequence.
In practice, it is usually difficult to assess the convergence of a sequence using the above definition. Instead, convergence can be assessed using the following criterion.
Lemma (criterion for
convergence)
Let
be a set of objects. Let
be a metric on
.
Let
be a sequence of objects belonging to
and
.
converges to
if and only
if
This is easily proved by defining a sequence
of real numbers
whose generic term
is
and
noting that the definition of convergence of
to
,
which
is
can
be written
as
which
is the definition of convergence of
to
.
So, in practice, the problem of assessing the convergence of a generic sequence of objects is simplified as follows:
find a metric
to measure the distance between the terms of the sequence
and the candidate limit
;
define a new sequence
,
where
;
study the convergence of the sequence
,
which is a simple problem, because
is a sequence of real numbers.
Please cite as:
Taboga, Marco (2021). "Limit of a sequence", Lectures on probability theory and mathematical statistics. Kindle Direct Publishing. Online appendix. https://www.statlect.com/mathematical-tools/limit-of-a-sequence.
Most of the learning materials found on this website are now available in a traditional textbook format.