A sequence that has no Cauchy subsequence











up vote
2
down vote

favorite













Give an example of a sequence in $mathbb{R}$ which has no subsequence which is a Cauchy sequence.




I can find out a sequence that is not a Cauchy sequence such as ${ln(n)}$ once $|ln(n)-ln(n+1)|=0$ but $|ln(n)-ln(2n)|=|ln(frac{1}{2})|>epsilon$
$forall epsilon<ln(frac{1}{2})$



I can still find a subsequence of the type ${ln(2n)}_{2ninmathbb{N}}$ such that $|ln(2n)-ln(2n+1)|=0$



Question:



What should I do to get a sequence that has no Cauchy subsequence?



Thanks in advance!










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 1




    In the first place, you should only be looking at sequences which are not convergent, right?
    – MPW
    yesterday






  • 3




    I do not understand your question. What do you mean by $|ln(2n)-ln(2n+1)|=0$?
    – Carsten S
    20 hours ago















up vote
2
down vote

favorite













Give an example of a sequence in $mathbb{R}$ which has no subsequence which is a Cauchy sequence.




I can find out a sequence that is not a Cauchy sequence such as ${ln(n)}$ once $|ln(n)-ln(n+1)|=0$ but $|ln(n)-ln(2n)|=|ln(frac{1}{2})|>epsilon$
$forall epsilon<ln(frac{1}{2})$



I can still find a subsequence of the type ${ln(2n)}_{2ninmathbb{N}}$ such that $|ln(2n)-ln(2n+1)|=0$



Question:



What should I do to get a sequence that has no Cauchy subsequence?



Thanks in advance!










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 1




    In the first place, you should only be looking at sequences which are not convergent, right?
    – MPW
    yesterday






  • 3




    I do not understand your question. What do you mean by $|ln(2n)-ln(2n+1)|=0$?
    – Carsten S
    20 hours ago













up vote
2
down vote

favorite









up vote
2
down vote

favorite












Give an example of a sequence in $mathbb{R}$ which has no subsequence which is a Cauchy sequence.




I can find out a sequence that is not a Cauchy sequence such as ${ln(n)}$ once $|ln(n)-ln(n+1)|=0$ but $|ln(n)-ln(2n)|=|ln(frac{1}{2})|>epsilon$
$forall epsilon<ln(frac{1}{2})$



I can still find a subsequence of the type ${ln(2n)}_{2ninmathbb{N}}$ such that $|ln(2n)-ln(2n+1)|=0$



Question:



What should I do to get a sequence that has no Cauchy subsequence?



Thanks in advance!










share|cite|improve this question
















Give an example of a sequence in $mathbb{R}$ which has no subsequence which is a Cauchy sequence.




I can find out a sequence that is not a Cauchy sequence such as ${ln(n)}$ once $|ln(n)-ln(n+1)|=0$ but $|ln(n)-ln(2n)|=|ln(frac{1}{2})|>epsilon$
$forall epsilon<ln(frac{1}{2})$



I can still find a subsequence of the type ${ln(2n)}_{2ninmathbb{N}}$ such that $|ln(2n)-ln(2n+1)|=0$



Question:



What should I do to get a sequence that has no Cauchy subsequence?



Thanks in advance!







real-analysis sequences-and-series general-topology metric-spaces cauchy-sequences






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited yesterday









Bernard

115k637107




115k637107










asked yesterday









Pedro Gomes

1,5692620




1,5692620








  • 1




    In the first place, you should only be looking at sequences which are not convergent, right?
    – MPW
    yesterday






  • 3




    I do not understand your question. What do you mean by $|ln(2n)-ln(2n+1)|=0$?
    – Carsten S
    20 hours ago














  • 1




    In the first place, you should only be looking at sequences which are not convergent, right?
    – MPW
    yesterday






  • 3




    I do not understand your question. What do you mean by $|ln(2n)-ln(2n+1)|=0$?
    – Carsten S
    20 hours ago








1




1




In the first place, you should only be looking at sequences which are not convergent, right?
– MPW
yesterday




In the first place, you should only be looking at sequences which are not convergent, right?
– MPW
yesterday




3




3




I do not understand your question. What do you mean by $|ln(2n)-ln(2n+1)|=0$?
– Carsten S
20 hours ago




I do not understand your question. What do you mean by $|ln(2n)-ln(2n+1)|=0$?
– Carsten S
20 hours ago










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
25
down vote



accepted










Take $a_n=n$. Then for any subsequence $n_k$, $|n_k-n_{k-1}|geq 1$. So, it has no Cauchy sub-sequence.






share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




John_Wick is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

























    up vote
    11
    down vote













    Take a sequence $(a_n)$ such that $a_nto infty$. Then each subsequence $(a_{n_k})$ is such that $a_{n_k}to infty$ and thus can't be Cauchy since necessarily Cauchy sequences are bounded.






    share|cite|improve this answer




























      up vote
      10
      down vote













      Take the sequence $1,2,3,4,ldots$ It has no Cauchy subsequence since the distance between any two distinct terms is at least $1$.






      share|cite|improve this answer




























        up vote
        7
        down vote













        I didn't understand your analysis but sequence $a_n = ln n$ doesn't have Cauchy subsequence since its limit is $infty$






        share|cite|improve this answer





















        • I guess this one uses the theorem that every Cauchy sequence converges
          – Robert Frost
          9 hours ago


















        up vote
        7
        down vote













        As Foobaz John says, any sequence with $a_ntoinfty$ works, and it's easy to see that $|a_n|toinfty$ is also sufficient. In fact this latter condition is necessary and sufficient. If $|a_n|nottoinfty$, then by definition there is some $c>0$ for which there are infinitely many values $n_i$ such that $|a_{n_i}|<c$ for each $i$. Now by Bolzano-Weierstrass the subsequence $a_{n_i}$ has an infinite subsequence $a_{n_{i_j}}$ which is convergent, and therefore Cauchy.






        share|cite|improve this answer





















        • Ah, Bolzano-Weierstrass, also known as the theorem about subsubsubscripts.
          – Misha Lavrov
          12 hours ago


















        up vote
        0
        down vote













        Bolzano-Weierstrass: Every bounded sequence has a convergent subsequence.



        Fact: Every convergent sequence is bounded.



        Strategy: Try an unbounded sequence.



        Guess: $a_n=n$



        Conclusion: (I leave it to you)






        share|cite|improve this answer





















          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3009766%2fa-sequence-that-has-no-cauchy-subsequence%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          6 Answers
          6






          active

          oldest

          votes








          6 Answers
          6






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          25
          down vote



          accepted










          Take $a_n=n$. Then for any subsequence $n_k$, $|n_k-n_{k-1}|geq 1$. So, it has no Cauchy sub-sequence.






          share|cite|improve this answer








          New contributor




          John_Wick is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.






















            up vote
            25
            down vote



            accepted










            Take $a_n=n$. Then for any subsequence $n_k$, $|n_k-n_{k-1}|geq 1$. So, it has no Cauchy sub-sequence.






            share|cite|improve this answer








            New contributor




            John_Wick is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.




















              up vote
              25
              down vote



              accepted







              up vote
              25
              down vote



              accepted






              Take $a_n=n$. Then for any subsequence $n_k$, $|n_k-n_{k-1}|geq 1$. So, it has no Cauchy sub-sequence.






              share|cite|improve this answer








              New contributor




              John_Wick is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.









              Take $a_n=n$. Then for any subsequence $n_k$, $|n_k-n_{k-1}|geq 1$. So, it has no Cauchy sub-sequence.







              share|cite|improve this answer








              New contributor




              John_Wick is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.









              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer






              New contributor




              John_Wick is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.









              answered yesterday









              John_Wick

              70419




              70419




              New contributor




              John_Wick is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.





              New contributor





              John_Wick is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.






              John_Wick is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.






















                  up vote
                  11
                  down vote













                  Take a sequence $(a_n)$ such that $a_nto infty$. Then each subsequence $(a_{n_k})$ is such that $a_{n_k}to infty$ and thus can't be Cauchy since necessarily Cauchy sequences are bounded.






                  share|cite|improve this answer

























                    up vote
                    11
                    down vote













                    Take a sequence $(a_n)$ such that $a_nto infty$. Then each subsequence $(a_{n_k})$ is such that $a_{n_k}to infty$ and thus can't be Cauchy since necessarily Cauchy sequences are bounded.






                    share|cite|improve this answer























                      up vote
                      11
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      11
                      down vote









                      Take a sequence $(a_n)$ such that $a_nto infty$. Then each subsequence $(a_{n_k})$ is such that $a_{n_k}to infty$ and thus can't be Cauchy since necessarily Cauchy sequences are bounded.






                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      Take a sequence $(a_n)$ such that $a_nto infty$. Then each subsequence $(a_{n_k})$ is such that $a_{n_k}to infty$ and thus can't be Cauchy since necessarily Cauchy sequences are bounded.







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered yesterday









                      Foobaz John

                      19.6k41250




                      19.6k41250






















                          up vote
                          10
                          down vote













                          Take the sequence $1,2,3,4,ldots$ It has no Cauchy subsequence since the distance between any two distinct terms is at least $1$.






                          share|cite|improve this answer

























                            up vote
                            10
                            down vote













                            Take the sequence $1,2,3,4,ldots$ It has no Cauchy subsequence since the distance between any two distinct terms is at least $1$.






                            share|cite|improve this answer























                              up vote
                              10
                              down vote










                              up vote
                              10
                              down vote









                              Take the sequence $1,2,3,4,ldots$ It has no Cauchy subsequence since the distance between any two distinct terms is at least $1$.






                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              Take the sequence $1,2,3,4,ldots$ It has no Cauchy subsequence since the distance between any two distinct terms is at least $1$.







                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              share|cite|improve this answer



                              share|cite|improve this answer










                              answered yesterday









                              José Carlos Santos

                              140k19111205




                              140k19111205






















                                  up vote
                                  7
                                  down vote













                                  I didn't understand your analysis but sequence $a_n = ln n$ doesn't have Cauchy subsequence since its limit is $infty$






                                  share|cite|improve this answer





















                                  • I guess this one uses the theorem that every Cauchy sequence converges
                                    – Robert Frost
                                    9 hours ago















                                  up vote
                                  7
                                  down vote













                                  I didn't understand your analysis but sequence $a_n = ln n$ doesn't have Cauchy subsequence since its limit is $infty$






                                  share|cite|improve this answer





















                                  • I guess this one uses the theorem that every Cauchy sequence converges
                                    – Robert Frost
                                    9 hours ago













                                  up vote
                                  7
                                  down vote










                                  up vote
                                  7
                                  down vote









                                  I didn't understand your analysis but sequence $a_n = ln n$ doesn't have Cauchy subsequence since its limit is $infty$






                                  share|cite|improve this answer












                                  I didn't understand your analysis but sequence $a_n = ln n$ doesn't have Cauchy subsequence since its limit is $infty$







                                  share|cite|improve this answer












                                  share|cite|improve this answer



                                  share|cite|improve this answer










                                  answered 23 hours ago









                                  RiaD

                                  720717




                                  720717












                                  • I guess this one uses the theorem that every Cauchy sequence converges
                                    – Robert Frost
                                    9 hours ago


















                                  • I guess this one uses the theorem that every Cauchy sequence converges
                                    – Robert Frost
                                    9 hours ago
















                                  I guess this one uses the theorem that every Cauchy sequence converges
                                  – Robert Frost
                                  9 hours ago




                                  I guess this one uses the theorem that every Cauchy sequence converges
                                  – Robert Frost
                                  9 hours ago










                                  up vote
                                  7
                                  down vote













                                  As Foobaz John says, any sequence with $a_ntoinfty$ works, and it's easy to see that $|a_n|toinfty$ is also sufficient. In fact this latter condition is necessary and sufficient. If $|a_n|nottoinfty$, then by definition there is some $c>0$ for which there are infinitely many values $n_i$ such that $|a_{n_i}|<c$ for each $i$. Now by Bolzano-Weierstrass the subsequence $a_{n_i}$ has an infinite subsequence $a_{n_{i_j}}$ which is convergent, and therefore Cauchy.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer





















                                  • Ah, Bolzano-Weierstrass, also known as the theorem about subsubsubscripts.
                                    – Misha Lavrov
                                    12 hours ago















                                  up vote
                                  7
                                  down vote













                                  As Foobaz John says, any sequence with $a_ntoinfty$ works, and it's easy to see that $|a_n|toinfty$ is also sufficient. In fact this latter condition is necessary and sufficient. If $|a_n|nottoinfty$, then by definition there is some $c>0$ for which there are infinitely many values $n_i$ such that $|a_{n_i}|<c$ for each $i$. Now by Bolzano-Weierstrass the subsequence $a_{n_i}$ has an infinite subsequence $a_{n_{i_j}}$ which is convergent, and therefore Cauchy.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer





















                                  • Ah, Bolzano-Weierstrass, also known as the theorem about subsubsubscripts.
                                    – Misha Lavrov
                                    12 hours ago













                                  up vote
                                  7
                                  down vote










                                  up vote
                                  7
                                  down vote









                                  As Foobaz John says, any sequence with $a_ntoinfty$ works, and it's easy to see that $|a_n|toinfty$ is also sufficient. In fact this latter condition is necessary and sufficient. If $|a_n|nottoinfty$, then by definition there is some $c>0$ for which there are infinitely many values $n_i$ such that $|a_{n_i}|<c$ for each $i$. Now by Bolzano-Weierstrass the subsequence $a_{n_i}$ has an infinite subsequence $a_{n_{i_j}}$ which is convergent, and therefore Cauchy.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer












                                  As Foobaz John says, any sequence with $a_ntoinfty$ works, and it's easy to see that $|a_n|toinfty$ is also sufficient. In fact this latter condition is necessary and sufficient. If $|a_n|nottoinfty$, then by definition there is some $c>0$ for which there are infinitely many values $n_i$ such that $|a_{n_i}|<c$ for each $i$. Now by Bolzano-Weierstrass the subsequence $a_{n_i}$ has an infinite subsequence $a_{n_{i_j}}$ which is convergent, and therefore Cauchy.







                                  share|cite|improve this answer












                                  share|cite|improve this answer



                                  share|cite|improve this answer










                                  answered 18 hours ago









                                  Especially Lime

                                  21k22655




                                  21k22655












                                  • Ah, Bolzano-Weierstrass, also known as the theorem about subsubsubscripts.
                                    – Misha Lavrov
                                    12 hours ago


















                                  • Ah, Bolzano-Weierstrass, also known as the theorem about subsubsubscripts.
                                    – Misha Lavrov
                                    12 hours ago
















                                  Ah, Bolzano-Weierstrass, also known as the theorem about subsubsubscripts.
                                  – Misha Lavrov
                                  12 hours ago




                                  Ah, Bolzano-Weierstrass, also known as the theorem about subsubsubscripts.
                                  – Misha Lavrov
                                  12 hours ago










                                  up vote
                                  0
                                  down vote













                                  Bolzano-Weierstrass: Every bounded sequence has a convergent subsequence.



                                  Fact: Every convergent sequence is bounded.



                                  Strategy: Try an unbounded sequence.



                                  Guess: $a_n=n$



                                  Conclusion: (I leave it to you)






                                  share|cite|improve this answer

























                                    up vote
                                    0
                                    down vote













                                    Bolzano-Weierstrass: Every bounded sequence has a convergent subsequence.



                                    Fact: Every convergent sequence is bounded.



                                    Strategy: Try an unbounded sequence.



                                    Guess: $a_n=n$



                                    Conclusion: (I leave it to you)






                                    share|cite|improve this answer























                                      up vote
                                      0
                                      down vote










                                      up vote
                                      0
                                      down vote









                                      Bolzano-Weierstrass: Every bounded sequence has a convergent subsequence.



                                      Fact: Every convergent sequence is bounded.



                                      Strategy: Try an unbounded sequence.



                                      Guess: $a_n=n$



                                      Conclusion: (I leave it to you)






                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      Bolzano-Weierstrass: Every bounded sequence has a convergent subsequence.



                                      Fact: Every convergent sequence is bounded.



                                      Strategy: Try an unbounded sequence.



                                      Guess: $a_n=n$



                                      Conclusion: (I leave it to you)







                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      share|cite|improve this answer



                                      share|cite|improve this answer










                                      answered 3 hours ago









                                      Jack Bauer

                                      1,226531




                                      1,226531






























                                           

                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded



















































                                           


                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function () {
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3009766%2fa-sequence-that-has-no-cauchy-subsequence%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                          }
                                          );

                                          Post as a guest















                                          Required, but never shown





















































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown

































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Popular posts from this blog

                                          數位音樂下載

                                          格利澤436b

                                          When can things happen in Etherscan, such as the picture below?