Print this page and work through it on paper. Revealed answers are never printed, so you can check one question and still print a clean sheet.

  1. Show the solution to question 1

    (a) Divide by the dominant power. Dividing numerator and denominator by ,

    Since and , the sum and constant-multiple laws give numerator and denominator , so the quotient law gives .

    (b) Rationalise. The form is , so nothing may be concluded from the pieces. Multiply and divide by the conjugate:

    where the last step divides top and bottom by (so ). The denominator tends to by continuity of the square root, so .

    Sanity check: .

    (c) Absolute values. The sign flips make itself hard to handle directly, so look at its size:

    By the Squeeze Theorem , and by the corollary on absolute values . (Contrast , whose absolute value tends to : there the corollary says nothing and the sequence diverges.)

    (d) Monotone Sequence Theorem. Compute a few terms to see what to prove: , , . The terms seem to rise toward .

    Bounded above by . True for . If then , so . By induction every term is below . Every term is also positive, since and square roots are nonnegative.

    Increasing. Because both sides are positive, is equivalent to , that is , that is . With the first factor is negative and the second positive, so the inequality holds.

    The sequence is increasing and bounded above, so by the Monotone Sequence Theorem it converges to some . Now, and only now, take limits in the recursion: as well, and the square root is continuous, so

    Since every term is at least , so is , which rules out . The limit is . Solving the equation before proving convergence would have been a bluff: for a divergent sequence the equation can still have a solution, and that solution means nothing.

  2. Show the solution to question 2

    (a) Read off the first term present. The term is , so the ratio is with : the series converges. The first term present is at : . Then

    Sanity check: after three terms, and the remaining tail is , giving .

    (b) Separate the non-repeating part.

    After the terms are geometric with first term and ratio , so they sum to

    Hence . Lowest terms: and share no factor. Check: .

    (c) Split, because both pieces converge. Term by term,

    Both are geometric with , so each series converges on its own, and the algebra of convergent series allows the split. First: . Second: . Total .

    Sanity check: partial sums climbing toward .

    (d) A geometric series with a variable ratio. Here and . It converges exactly when , that is , that is . At and the ratio is , the terms do not tend to , and the series diverges. For ,

    Check at : the series is and the formula gives . This is a power series centred at with radius , summed by the one method that gives a closed form.

  3. Show the solution to question 3

    (a) Partial fractions, gap of one. Write , so . Setting gives ; setting gives . So , which is with , and

    As , . Check: .

    (b) Gap of three: three survivors at each end. Partial fractions give . Write out enough of to see the pattern:

    Every negative with is cancelled by the positive three brackets later. What survives is the three leading positives and the three trailing negatives:

    The three tail fractions tend to , so the sum is . Check at : the formula gives , which is . Answering by cancelling “everything” would be wrong: the gap leaves three survivors, not one.

    (c) A logarithm that telescopes. By the laws of logarithms,

    so with the term is and . Since and is continuous at , the second logarithm tends to , and

    Check: , and the formula gives as well. A negative sum is fine: every term is the logarithm of a number below .

  4. Show the solution to question 4

    (a) The wrong sentence is “so by the Divergence Test the series converges.” The Divergence Test runs in one direction only: if then diverges. When it says nothing at all; it never proves convergence. Terms tending to is necessary for convergence, not sufficient.

    Correct verdict: this is a -series with , so it diverges. (Via the Integral Test: .) The student's conclusion is not just unjustified but false.

    (b) The wrong sentence is “so the Alternating Series Test shows the series converges.” The test has two hypotheses, and the student checked only one. The other is , and here . The test does not apply.

    Correct verdict: the terms approach and have no limit, so by the Divergence Test the series diverges. Check: the partial sums run and never settle.

    (c) The wrong sentence is “decays like with .” Comparison with a geometric series needs a fixed ratio . Here the base is below but climbs toward as the exponent grows, and the two effects compete; there is no single with for all large .

    Compute the limit of the terms instead. Take logarithms: . Pass to the function , which is of the form as . L'Hôpital's Rule (both parts differentiable for , denominator's derivative ) gives

    By the theorem on sequence limits from function limits, , and since is continuous, . By the Divergence Test the series diverges. Sanity check: , close to and nowhere near .

  5. Show the solution to question 5

    (a) The rectangles below the curve. Draw falling from to . For put a rectangle on the base with height : on height , on height , on height , on height . Each has area , and its top-right corner sits on the curve. Its top edge runs to the left from there, and stays under the curve because is decreasing: for we have . The picture is a staircase tucked under the curve, touching it at the right end of every step. Its total area is at most .

    The rectangles above the curve. Redraw the curve, and for put a rectangle on the base with height : on height , on height , on height , on height . Now the top-left corner is on the curve, and the top edge runs to the right above the curve, again because is decreasing: for , . Its total area is at least .

    The other two hypotheses do quieter jobs: positivity makes every area a genuine area and the partial sums increasing, and continuity makes the integral meaningful. Decreasing is what decides the side.

    (b) The general inequalities. Below the curve, use the rectangles of heights on :

    Above the curve, use the rectangles of heights on :

    Check at : .

    (c) Divergence, and how slow it is. From the lower bound, , so the partial sums of are unbounded and the harmonic series diverges. (This is the Integral Test's proof, with the integral computed.)

    From the upper bound, . If then , so . Since is roughly , none of the first hundred and eighty million partial sums reaches : the series diverges, but at the pace of , and no amount of adding by hand will ever show it.

  6. Show the solution to question 6

    (a) Limit comparison with . Keeping the dominant powers, the term looks like . With ,

    which is finite and positive. Since converges (), the series converges by the Limit Comparison Test. (Direct comparison also works: .)

    (b) Direct comparison with the harmonic series. For , because ; and always (its discriminant is negative). Taking square roots of positive quantities, , so

    The series dominates , which diverges, so it diverges by the Direct Comparison Test. Direction check: to prove divergence one must bound below by a divergent series, which is what was done.

    (c) Comparison with a geometric series. For large the is negligible next to , so the term behaves like . Limit comparison with :

    Since is geometric with ratio below , the series converges. A direct comparison is available too: for , (equivalently ), so and .

    (d) Not a -series. The tempting argument “the exponent exceeds , so it converges” is wrong: the -series rule needs a constant exponent, and shrinks toward . Limit comparison with :

    using (which follows from and continuity of ). The harmonic series diverges, so this series diverges. Its terms are only a factor , which tends to , smaller than — not nearly enough.

  7. Show the solution to question 7

    (a) The two hypotheses. Here .

    Limit. Dividing by : .

    Decreasing. Let . By the quotient rule,

    which is negative for . So for all , and “for all large ” is all the test asks (the first few terms never affect convergence). By the Alternating Series Test the series converges.

    Absolute or conditional? behaves like . Limit comparison with :

    and diverges (), so diverges. The series converges conditionally: the cancellation between signs is doing all the work.

    (b) Error control. Here : positive, decreasing (since ) and tending to , so the estimation theorem applies: . We need . Since and , the smallest choice is , that is ; with the guarantee is only .

    Now add six terms over the common denominator :

    dividing by ; and , share no factor.

    The sign of is the sign of the first omitted term, , so the true sum lies below :

    A check that needs no calculator's trust: the series is the exponential series at with the term removed, so , while . The true value is indeed below, by about .

  8. Show the solution to question 8

    (a) Let , positive for .

    Limit. The form is ; pass to and apply L'Hôpital's Rule: . By the theorem on sequence limits from function limits, .

    Decreasing. for , so decreases from onward, which is enough.

    By the Alternating Series Test the series converges. For absolute convergence look at : for we have , hence , and the harmonic series diverges, so diverges by the Direct Comparison Test. The series is conditionally convergent.

    (b) Proof. Suppose converges. The terms of a convergent series tend to , so , and therefore there is an index with for every . For such ,

    So beyond the nonnegative terms are dominated by the terms of the convergent series , and the Direct Comparison Test (whose hypothesis is only required for all beyond some index) shows that converges.

    Note exactly where absolute convergence was used: to know that is eventually below , so that squaring makes the terms smaller rather than larger. That is the only ingredient.

    (c) Both converses fail.

    Squares converge, absolute values do not. Take . Then converges (), while diverges.

    The series converges, its squares do not. Take . Since decreases to , the Alternating Series Test gives convergence (conditional, as diverges). But , and diverges.

    The second example shows why the hypothesis in (b) had to be absolute convergence: squaring destroys the signs, and a series that converged only because of cancellation between signs loses its reason to converge.

  9. Show the solution to question 9

    (a) Ratio Test, because of the factorials. Consecutive factorials collapse:

    The series converges (absolutely). Sanity check: , , ; the ratios are heading to .

    (b) Root Test, because the whole term is an th power. The exponent is , so an th root leaves an exponent of :

    The series converges. (The Ratio Test would face , which is far more work for the same answer.)

    (c) Ratio Test, because of the factorial.

    The series diverges; its terms grow, since outruns .

    (d) The Ratio Test is silent.

    so and the test decides nothing — as it never does for a rational function of . Reporting “diverges” here would be an error. Instead, partial fractions: , so the series telescopes,

    The series converges, with sum . (Limit comparison with would also prove convergence, but not give the sum.)

  10. Show the solution to question 10

    (a) Ratio Test on absolute values.

    Convergence needs , that is . The centre is and the radius is — not : the factor of inside halves it. The candidate interval is .

    At : and the term is , the alternating harmonic series, which converges by the Alternating Series Test ( decreases to ).

    At : and , so the term is : the harmonic series, which diverges.

    Interval of convergence: .

    (b) Only even powers. Consecutive terms differ by a factor involving , not :

    This is below exactly when , that is : centre , . At the term is in both cases, and the harmonic series diverges. Interval of convergence: .

    (c) Ratio Test with the given fact.

    Convergence for , so about the centre .

    At the endpoints the Ratio Test returns and is silent, so look at the terms themselves: . From the computation above with ,

    because . So is strictly increasing, hence for every , and the terms cannot tend to . By the Divergence Test the series diverges at and at alike (the sign pattern does not matter; the terms fail to shrink).

    Interval of convergence: .

  11. Show the solution to question 11

    (a) The Lagrange remainder, two-sided. Take , centre and . The Taylor polynomial is , so the middle quantity is exactly the remainder . Since has continuous derivatives of every order, Taylor's Theorem in Lagrange form gives a number strictly between and with

    For we have , and is strictly increasing, so . Multiplying through by preserves the strict inequalities:

    Taylor's Inequality with would give only the upper bound, and only with ; the Lagrange form is what gives the lower bound and the strictness. Check at : , between and .

    (b) Squeeze. Divide (a) by :

    As the right-hand bound tends to by continuity of , and the left-hand bound is the constant . By the Squeeze Theorem the limit is . (This is the coefficient of in the exponential series, as it should be.)

    (c) Proof that is irrational. Suppose, for contradiction, that with positive integers and . Multiply the series for by and split it at :

    (The split is legitimate: the first piece is a finite sum and the second is the tail of a convergent series, and both converge.) The left side is , an integer. In the first sum every gives , an integer; call the first sum . Therefore the tail

    is an integer.

    Now bound . Every term is positive, so . For ,

    a product of factors each at least , so , with strict inequality as soon as . Summing over and writing ,

    the middle step being a geometric series with ratio and first term . So is an integer with , which is impossible. Hence is irrational.

    The whole proof rests on one comparison: the factorial tail is beaten by a geometric tail, and a geometric tail can be summed exactly. (With the same argument shows , that is, is not even an integer.)

  12. Show the solution to question 12

    (a) Expand both pieces to one order past the cancellation. For ,

    The linear terms cancel, and the numerator is

    Dividing by gives , a power series, hence continuous inside its interval of convergence, so the limit is . Check at : and ; the difference divided by is .

    (b) Integrate the series term by term. Dividing the sine series by ,

    for all , and the series takes the value at , so it represents the integrand (extended continuously) on all of with infinite radius. Term-by-term integration is therefore legal:

    This is an alternating series whose terms decrease to , so by the Alternating Series Estimation Theorem the error after terms is at most the first omitted term. The bound is too large, but , so two terms suffice:

    The first omitted term is positive, so the true value lies above the estimate:

    (The true value is , inside the bracket.)

    (c) Recognise the arctangent series. The standard series is

    To match we need to produce : take , for which . Then

    The point satisfies , strictly inside the interval of convergence, so the substitution is legitimate (and the series in fact converges absolutely, since its terms are dominated by the geometric ). Check: , against .

Full solutions sheet →