Show that $lim_n sum_{k=1}^nfrac{B_k}{k!},frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}=sum_{k=1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}$











up vote
3
down vote

favorite












I need to show that



$$lim_{ntoinfty} sum_{k=1}^nfrac{B_k}{k!},frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}=sum_{k=1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}$$



where $n^underline{k-1}:=prod_{j=0}^{k-2}(n-j)$ is a falling factorial and the $B_k$ are the Bernoulli numbers, and I know that the RHS of above converges to $1/(e-1)$. I had two attempts:



1) First I tried to use the dominated convergence theorem setting $a_n(k):=frac{B_k}{k!},frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}chi_{[1,n]}(k)$, then clearly $lim_n a_n(k)=B_k/k!$ for each $kinBbb N_{ge 1}$, however I dont know if $sum_{k=1}^infty|B_k|/k!$ converges, and I dont know any absolutely convergent series that dominates, so Im stuck at this step.



2) A more elementary approach



$$left|sum_{k=1}^infty a_n(k)-sum_{k=1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}right|leleft|sum_{k=1}^M(a_n(k)-B_k/k!)right|+sum_{k=M+1}^nleft|1-frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}right|+left|sum_{k=n+1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}right|$$



such that $|B_k/k!|<1$ for $kge M+1$. Then taking limits above we have that



$$lim_{ntoinfty}left|sum_{k=1}^inftyleft(a_n(k)-frac{B_k}{k!}right)right|lelim_{ntoinfty}sum_{k=M+1}^nleft(1-frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}right)$$



for any fixed enough large $M$. Then if I can show that for each $epsilon>0$ there is some $MinBbb N$ such that



$$lim_{ntoinfty}sum_{k=M+1}^nleft(1-frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}right)<epsilon$$



then Im done. However it is not clear how to accomplish (or if it is possible) this task. I thought about use the Stirling approximation on $n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}$, however it is not clear that I can apply an asymptotic expression inside a series, so Im again stuck.





There is some easy way (the more elementary the better) to show the converge of the limit of the title? Thank you.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Since $n^{underline{k-1}} =0$ if $k-2 ge n$ the series $sum_{k=M+1}^infty (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k)$ is divergent!
    – p4sch
    yesterday












  • @p4sch I fixed it, thank you. However I find a solution!
    – Masacroso
    yesterday






  • 1




    The same problem occurs in the last line: $M^{underline{k-1}} =0$ if $k ge M+2$. You would like to show that $sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k)$ can be made small for all large $n ge N$ independent of $n$.
    – p4sch
    yesterday










  • There is also another problem in your post: Note that $n^{underline{k-1}}$ has only $k-1$ terms in the product. Thus $n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k = n^{-1} prod_{j=0}^{k-2} (1-j/n) le n^{-1}$. I.e. your limes is zero, but $ 0 > (2-e)/(e-1) =1/(e-1)-1 = sum_{k=1}^infty B_k/k!$.
    – p4sch
    yesterday










  • @p4sch yes, this was a persistent typographic error, thank you
    – Masacroso
    yesterday















up vote
3
down vote

favorite












I need to show that



$$lim_{ntoinfty} sum_{k=1}^nfrac{B_k}{k!},frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}=sum_{k=1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}$$



where $n^underline{k-1}:=prod_{j=0}^{k-2}(n-j)$ is a falling factorial and the $B_k$ are the Bernoulli numbers, and I know that the RHS of above converges to $1/(e-1)$. I had two attempts:



1) First I tried to use the dominated convergence theorem setting $a_n(k):=frac{B_k}{k!},frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}chi_{[1,n]}(k)$, then clearly $lim_n a_n(k)=B_k/k!$ for each $kinBbb N_{ge 1}$, however I dont know if $sum_{k=1}^infty|B_k|/k!$ converges, and I dont know any absolutely convergent series that dominates, so Im stuck at this step.



2) A more elementary approach



$$left|sum_{k=1}^infty a_n(k)-sum_{k=1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}right|leleft|sum_{k=1}^M(a_n(k)-B_k/k!)right|+sum_{k=M+1}^nleft|1-frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}right|+left|sum_{k=n+1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}right|$$



such that $|B_k/k!|<1$ for $kge M+1$. Then taking limits above we have that



$$lim_{ntoinfty}left|sum_{k=1}^inftyleft(a_n(k)-frac{B_k}{k!}right)right|lelim_{ntoinfty}sum_{k=M+1}^nleft(1-frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}right)$$



for any fixed enough large $M$. Then if I can show that for each $epsilon>0$ there is some $MinBbb N$ such that



$$lim_{ntoinfty}sum_{k=M+1}^nleft(1-frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}right)<epsilon$$



then Im done. However it is not clear how to accomplish (or if it is possible) this task. I thought about use the Stirling approximation on $n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}$, however it is not clear that I can apply an asymptotic expression inside a series, so Im again stuck.





There is some easy way (the more elementary the better) to show the converge of the limit of the title? Thank you.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • Since $n^{underline{k-1}} =0$ if $k-2 ge n$ the series $sum_{k=M+1}^infty (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k)$ is divergent!
    – p4sch
    yesterday












  • @p4sch I fixed it, thank you. However I find a solution!
    – Masacroso
    yesterday






  • 1




    The same problem occurs in the last line: $M^{underline{k-1}} =0$ if $k ge M+2$. You would like to show that $sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k)$ can be made small for all large $n ge N$ independent of $n$.
    – p4sch
    yesterday










  • There is also another problem in your post: Note that $n^{underline{k-1}}$ has only $k-1$ terms in the product. Thus $n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k = n^{-1} prod_{j=0}^{k-2} (1-j/n) le n^{-1}$. I.e. your limes is zero, but $ 0 > (2-e)/(e-1) =1/(e-1)-1 = sum_{k=1}^infty B_k/k!$.
    – p4sch
    yesterday










  • @p4sch yes, this was a persistent typographic error, thank you
    – Masacroso
    yesterday













up vote
3
down vote

favorite









up vote
3
down vote

favorite











I need to show that



$$lim_{ntoinfty} sum_{k=1}^nfrac{B_k}{k!},frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}=sum_{k=1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}$$



where $n^underline{k-1}:=prod_{j=0}^{k-2}(n-j)$ is a falling factorial and the $B_k$ are the Bernoulli numbers, and I know that the RHS of above converges to $1/(e-1)$. I had two attempts:



1) First I tried to use the dominated convergence theorem setting $a_n(k):=frac{B_k}{k!},frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}chi_{[1,n]}(k)$, then clearly $lim_n a_n(k)=B_k/k!$ for each $kinBbb N_{ge 1}$, however I dont know if $sum_{k=1}^infty|B_k|/k!$ converges, and I dont know any absolutely convergent series that dominates, so Im stuck at this step.



2) A more elementary approach



$$left|sum_{k=1}^infty a_n(k)-sum_{k=1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}right|leleft|sum_{k=1}^M(a_n(k)-B_k/k!)right|+sum_{k=M+1}^nleft|1-frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}right|+left|sum_{k=n+1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}right|$$



such that $|B_k/k!|<1$ for $kge M+1$. Then taking limits above we have that



$$lim_{ntoinfty}left|sum_{k=1}^inftyleft(a_n(k)-frac{B_k}{k!}right)right|lelim_{ntoinfty}sum_{k=M+1}^nleft(1-frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}right)$$



for any fixed enough large $M$. Then if I can show that for each $epsilon>0$ there is some $MinBbb N$ such that



$$lim_{ntoinfty}sum_{k=M+1}^nleft(1-frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}right)<epsilon$$



then Im done. However it is not clear how to accomplish (or if it is possible) this task. I thought about use the Stirling approximation on $n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}$, however it is not clear that I can apply an asymptotic expression inside a series, so Im again stuck.





There is some easy way (the more elementary the better) to show the converge of the limit of the title? Thank you.










share|cite|improve this question















I need to show that



$$lim_{ntoinfty} sum_{k=1}^nfrac{B_k}{k!},frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}=sum_{k=1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}$$



where $n^underline{k-1}:=prod_{j=0}^{k-2}(n-j)$ is a falling factorial and the $B_k$ are the Bernoulli numbers, and I know that the RHS of above converges to $1/(e-1)$. I had two attempts:



1) First I tried to use the dominated convergence theorem setting $a_n(k):=frac{B_k}{k!},frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}chi_{[1,n]}(k)$, then clearly $lim_n a_n(k)=B_k/k!$ for each $kinBbb N_{ge 1}$, however I dont know if $sum_{k=1}^infty|B_k|/k!$ converges, and I dont know any absolutely convergent series that dominates, so Im stuck at this step.



2) A more elementary approach



$$left|sum_{k=1}^infty a_n(k)-sum_{k=1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}right|leleft|sum_{k=1}^M(a_n(k)-B_k/k!)right|+sum_{k=M+1}^nleft|1-frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}right|+left|sum_{k=n+1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}right|$$



such that $|B_k/k!|<1$ for $kge M+1$. Then taking limits above we have that



$$lim_{ntoinfty}left|sum_{k=1}^inftyleft(a_n(k)-frac{B_k}{k!}right)right|lelim_{ntoinfty}sum_{k=M+1}^nleft(1-frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}right)$$



for any fixed enough large $M$. Then if I can show that for each $epsilon>0$ there is some $MinBbb N$ such that



$$lim_{ntoinfty}sum_{k=M+1}^nleft(1-frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}right)<epsilon$$



then Im done. However it is not clear how to accomplish (or if it is possible) this task. I thought about use the Stirling approximation on $n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}$, however it is not clear that I can apply an asymptotic expression inside a series, so Im again stuck.





There is some easy way (the more elementary the better) to show the converge of the limit of the title? Thank you.







real-analysis limits convergence






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited yesterday

























asked yesterday









Masacroso

12.2k41746




12.2k41746












  • Since $n^{underline{k-1}} =0$ if $k-2 ge n$ the series $sum_{k=M+1}^infty (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k)$ is divergent!
    – p4sch
    yesterday












  • @p4sch I fixed it, thank you. However I find a solution!
    – Masacroso
    yesterday






  • 1




    The same problem occurs in the last line: $M^{underline{k-1}} =0$ if $k ge M+2$. You would like to show that $sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k)$ can be made small for all large $n ge N$ independent of $n$.
    – p4sch
    yesterday










  • There is also another problem in your post: Note that $n^{underline{k-1}}$ has only $k-1$ terms in the product. Thus $n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k = n^{-1} prod_{j=0}^{k-2} (1-j/n) le n^{-1}$. I.e. your limes is zero, but $ 0 > (2-e)/(e-1) =1/(e-1)-1 = sum_{k=1}^infty B_k/k!$.
    – p4sch
    yesterday










  • @p4sch yes, this was a persistent typographic error, thank you
    – Masacroso
    yesterday


















  • Since $n^{underline{k-1}} =0$ if $k-2 ge n$ the series $sum_{k=M+1}^infty (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k)$ is divergent!
    – p4sch
    yesterday












  • @p4sch I fixed it, thank you. However I find a solution!
    – Masacroso
    yesterday






  • 1




    The same problem occurs in the last line: $M^{underline{k-1}} =0$ if $k ge M+2$. You would like to show that $sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k)$ can be made small for all large $n ge N$ independent of $n$.
    – p4sch
    yesterday










  • There is also another problem in your post: Note that $n^{underline{k-1}}$ has only $k-1$ terms in the product. Thus $n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k = n^{-1} prod_{j=0}^{k-2} (1-j/n) le n^{-1}$. I.e. your limes is zero, but $ 0 > (2-e)/(e-1) =1/(e-1)-1 = sum_{k=1}^infty B_k/k!$.
    – p4sch
    yesterday










  • @p4sch yes, this was a persistent typographic error, thank you
    – Masacroso
    yesterday
















Since $n^{underline{k-1}} =0$ if $k-2 ge n$ the series $sum_{k=M+1}^infty (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k)$ is divergent!
– p4sch
yesterday






Since $n^{underline{k-1}} =0$ if $k-2 ge n$ the series $sum_{k=M+1}^infty (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k)$ is divergent!
– p4sch
yesterday














@p4sch I fixed it, thank you. However I find a solution!
– Masacroso
yesterday




@p4sch I fixed it, thank you. However I find a solution!
– Masacroso
yesterday




1




1




The same problem occurs in the last line: $M^{underline{k-1}} =0$ if $k ge M+2$. You would like to show that $sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k)$ can be made small for all large $n ge N$ independent of $n$.
– p4sch
yesterday




The same problem occurs in the last line: $M^{underline{k-1}} =0$ if $k ge M+2$. You would like to show that $sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k)$ can be made small for all large $n ge N$ independent of $n$.
– p4sch
yesterday












There is also another problem in your post: Note that $n^{underline{k-1}}$ has only $k-1$ terms in the product. Thus $n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k = n^{-1} prod_{j=0}^{k-2} (1-j/n) le n^{-1}$. I.e. your limes is zero, but $ 0 > (2-e)/(e-1) =1/(e-1)-1 = sum_{k=1}^infty B_k/k!$.
– p4sch
yesterday




There is also another problem in your post: Note that $n^{underline{k-1}}$ has only $k-1$ terms in the product. Thus $n^{underline{k-1}}/n^k = n^{-1} prod_{j=0}^{k-2} (1-j/n) le n^{-1}$. I.e. your limes is zero, but $ 0 > (2-e)/(e-1) =1/(e-1)-1 = sum_{k=1}^infty B_k/k!$.
– p4sch
yesterday












@p4sch yes, this was a persistent typographic error, thank you
– Masacroso
yesterday




@p4sch yes, this was a persistent typographic error, thank you
– Masacroso
yesterday










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote













The Bernoulli numbers are defined
$$frac{z}{e^z-1} = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{B_k}{k!}z^k$$
and this is a holomorphic function on the domain defined by $|mathrm{Im}(z)| < 2pi$. Thus the radius of convergence is $2 pi$. Any power seriers is absolutely convergent in the radius of convergence.



Here, for example we know that $|frac{B_k}{k!} 2^k| leq 1$ for all $k ge N$ and some $N in mathbb{N}$, because the series is convergent for $z=2$. Thus
$$sum_{k=N}^n frac{|B_k|}{k!} = sum_{k=N}^n frac{1}{2^k} le 1. $$
In other words: The series is absolute convergent and this can be used in order to show the claim (by using the dominated convergence theorem).



Second answer: The sum $sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1})$ isn't convergent, i.e. you have you use a better bound for $|B_k|/k!$ in order to get that the series is convergent. We use $1-x ge e^{-x}/2$ for $0 <x le 1/2$ to get
$$tag{1}sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}) ge frac{1}{2} sum_{kge n/2+2}^n exp(-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}),$$
where we used that
$$n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1} = prod_{j=0}^{k-2} (1-j/n) le Big(1-frac{k-2}{n}Big)$$
is at most $1/2$ if $k ge n/2+2$. Now note that $ln(1-x) le -x$ for all $x ge 0$ to obtain also the lower bound
$$ ln (n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}) = sum_{j=0}^{k-2} ln(1-j/n) le -sum_{j=1}^{k-2} j/n = - frac{(k-1)(k-2)}{2n}.$$
All in all, we see for $n ge 2M-4$ that (1) can be bounded below by
$$frac{1}{2} sum_{k=lfloor n/2+2 rfloor +1}^n exp[-exp {-(k-1)(k-2)/(2n)}].$$
and this is bounded by
$$ frac{n}{2} exp(- exp{-n/8}) rightarrow infty.$$






share|cite|improve this answer



















  • 1




    $|B_k 2^k /k! | le 1$ is nothing else than $|B_k/k!| le 2^{-k}$.
    – p4sch
    yesterday










  • in your second answer you are saying that $|n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}|<1/2$, but this is relative to the value of $k$ and $n$, so you cant make the lower bound on $(1)$ because $n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}to 1$ as $ntoinfty$ for fixed $k$
    – Masacroso
    yesterday












  • $k$ is not fixed, since we sum over $k=M+1$ up to $k=n$. I repaired my answer. You just need to skip sum summands and begin to sum at $k ge n/2+2$.
    – p4sch
    19 hours ago




















up vote
0
down vote













I find a solution using the recursion



$$B_k=-sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k}jfrac{B_j}{k-1+j}tag1$$



and the dominated convergence theorem. From $(1)$ and setting $M:=sup_{kinBbb N}|B_k|/k!$ (what is finite because I know that $sum_{k=1}^infty B_k/k!$ converges) then we have that



$$begin{align}left|frac{B_k}{k!}right|&=left|frac1{k!}sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k}jfrac{B_j}{k-j+1}right|=left|sum_{j=0}^{k-1}frac{B_j}{j!}frac1{(k-j+1)!}right|\
&lefrac{M k}{(k-1)!}sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k-1}j
=frac{Mk}{(k-1)!}2^{k-1}\&=2kMprod_{j=0}^{k-4}frac2{k-1-j}end{align}tag2$$



Then it is easy to check that for $kge 6$ we have that $frac{|B_k|}{k!}le 16Mfrac{k}{(k-3)^3}$, so by the integral test the series $sum_{k=1}^infty |B_k|/k!$ converges.



Now using the first approach on the question we can apply the dominated convergence theorem and find that



$$lim_{ntoinfty}sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}cdotfrac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}=lim_{ntoinfty}int_{Bbb N_{ge 1}}a_n(k) ,dmathcal H^0=int_{Bbb N_{ge 1}}frac{B_k}{k!},dmathcal H^0=sum_{k=1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}tag3$$



as desired. However I would like to see, if possible, a more simple solution that doesn't use "advanced" theorems as the dominated convergence theorem.



P.S.: $dmathcal H^0$ is just the counting measure.





Essentially the same question appear in a mathematical magazine. In short it says that $n^underline{k-1}in n^{k-1}+O(n^{k-2})$ as $ntoinfty$, thus $frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}in 1+O(n^{-1})$ and we find that



$$sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}cdotfrac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}in sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}+O(n^{-1})sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}tag4$$



Then in the article the author take limits on $(4)$, "giving" the wanted identity. However this procedure seems wrong as its said in the last link. I added this to the answer for the curious reader.






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%2f3004849%2fshow-that-lim-n-sum-k-1n-fracb-kk-fracn-underlinek-1nk-1%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    1
    down vote













    The Bernoulli numbers are defined
    $$frac{z}{e^z-1} = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{B_k}{k!}z^k$$
    and this is a holomorphic function on the domain defined by $|mathrm{Im}(z)| < 2pi$. Thus the radius of convergence is $2 pi$. Any power seriers is absolutely convergent in the radius of convergence.



    Here, for example we know that $|frac{B_k}{k!} 2^k| leq 1$ for all $k ge N$ and some $N in mathbb{N}$, because the series is convergent for $z=2$. Thus
    $$sum_{k=N}^n frac{|B_k|}{k!} = sum_{k=N}^n frac{1}{2^k} le 1. $$
    In other words: The series is absolute convergent and this can be used in order to show the claim (by using the dominated convergence theorem).



    Second answer: The sum $sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1})$ isn't convergent, i.e. you have you use a better bound for $|B_k|/k!$ in order to get that the series is convergent. We use $1-x ge e^{-x}/2$ for $0 <x le 1/2$ to get
    $$tag{1}sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}) ge frac{1}{2} sum_{kge n/2+2}^n exp(-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}),$$
    where we used that
    $$n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1} = prod_{j=0}^{k-2} (1-j/n) le Big(1-frac{k-2}{n}Big)$$
    is at most $1/2$ if $k ge n/2+2$. Now note that $ln(1-x) le -x$ for all $x ge 0$ to obtain also the lower bound
    $$ ln (n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}) = sum_{j=0}^{k-2} ln(1-j/n) le -sum_{j=1}^{k-2} j/n = - frac{(k-1)(k-2)}{2n}.$$
    All in all, we see for $n ge 2M-4$ that (1) can be bounded below by
    $$frac{1}{2} sum_{k=lfloor n/2+2 rfloor +1}^n exp[-exp {-(k-1)(k-2)/(2n)}].$$
    and this is bounded by
    $$ frac{n}{2} exp(- exp{-n/8}) rightarrow infty.$$






    share|cite|improve this answer



















    • 1




      $|B_k 2^k /k! | le 1$ is nothing else than $|B_k/k!| le 2^{-k}$.
      – p4sch
      yesterday










    • in your second answer you are saying that $|n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}|<1/2$, but this is relative to the value of $k$ and $n$, so you cant make the lower bound on $(1)$ because $n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}to 1$ as $ntoinfty$ for fixed $k$
      – Masacroso
      yesterday












    • $k$ is not fixed, since we sum over $k=M+1$ up to $k=n$. I repaired my answer. You just need to skip sum summands and begin to sum at $k ge n/2+2$.
      – p4sch
      19 hours ago

















    up vote
    1
    down vote













    The Bernoulli numbers are defined
    $$frac{z}{e^z-1} = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{B_k}{k!}z^k$$
    and this is a holomorphic function on the domain defined by $|mathrm{Im}(z)| < 2pi$. Thus the radius of convergence is $2 pi$. Any power seriers is absolutely convergent in the radius of convergence.



    Here, for example we know that $|frac{B_k}{k!} 2^k| leq 1$ for all $k ge N$ and some $N in mathbb{N}$, because the series is convergent for $z=2$. Thus
    $$sum_{k=N}^n frac{|B_k|}{k!} = sum_{k=N}^n frac{1}{2^k} le 1. $$
    In other words: The series is absolute convergent and this can be used in order to show the claim (by using the dominated convergence theorem).



    Second answer: The sum $sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1})$ isn't convergent, i.e. you have you use a better bound for $|B_k|/k!$ in order to get that the series is convergent. We use $1-x ge e^{-x}/2$ for $0 <x le 1/2$ to get
    $$tag{1}sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}) ge frac{1}{2} sum_{kge n/2+2}^n exp(-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}),$$
    where we used that
    $$n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1} = prod_{j=0}^{k-2} (1-j/n) le Big(1-frac{k-2}{n}Big)$$
    is at most $1/2$ if $k ge n/2+2$. Now note that $ln(1-x) le -x$ for all $x ge 0$ to obtain also the lower bound
    $$ ln (n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}) = sum_{j=0}^{k-2} ln(1-j/n) le -sum_{j=1}^{k-2} j/n = - frac{(k-1)(k-2)}{2n}.$$
    All in all, we see for $n ge 2M-4$ that (1) can be bounded below by
    $$frac{1}{2} sum_{k=lfloor n/2+2 rfloor +1}^n exp[-exp {-(k-1)(k-2)/(2n)}].$$
    and this is bounded by
    $$ frac{n}{2} exp(- exp{-n/8}) rightarrow infty.$$






    share|cite|improve this answer



















    • 1




      $|B_k 2^k /k! | le 1$ is nothing else than $|B_k/k!| le 2^{-k}$.
      – p4sch
      yesterday










    • in your second answer you are saying that $|n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}|<1/2$, but this is relative to the value of $k$ and $n$, so you cant make the lower bound on $(1)$ because $n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}to 1$ as $ntoinfty$ for fixed $k$
      – Masacroso
      yesterday












    • $k$ is not fixed, since we sum over $k=M+1$ up to $k=n$. I repaired my answer. You just need to skip sum summands and begin to sum at $k ge n/2+2$.
      – p4sch
      19 hours ago















    up vote
    1
    down vote










    up vote
    1
    down vote









    The Bernoulli numbers are defined
    $$frac{z}{e^z-1} = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{B_k}{k!}z^k$$
    and this is a holomorphic function on the domain defined by $|mathrm{Im}(z)| < 2pi$. Thus the radius of convergence is $2 pi$. Any power seriers is absolutely convergent in the radius of convergence.



    Here, for example we know that $|frac{B_k}{k!} 2^k| leq 1$ for all $k ge N$ and some $N in mathbb{N}$, because the series is convergent for $z=2$. Thus
    $$sum_{k=N}^n frac{|B_k|}{k!} = sum_{k=N}^n frac{1}{2^k} le 1. $$
    In other words: The series is absolute convergent and this can be used in order to show the claim (by using the dominated convergence theorem).



    Second answer: The sum $sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1})$ isn't convergent, i.e. you have you use a better bound for $|B_k|/k!$ in order to get that the series is convergent. We use $1-x ge e^{-x}/2$ for $0 <x le 1/2$ to get
    $$tag{1}sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}) ge frac{1}{2} sum_{kge n/2+2}^n exp(-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}),$$
    where we used that
    $$n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1} = prod_{j=0}^{k-2} (1-j/n) le Big(1-frac{k-2}{n}Big)$$
    is at most $1/2$ if $k ge n/2+2$. Now note that $ln(1-x) le -x$ for all $x ge 0$ to obtain also the lower bound
    $$ ln (n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}) = sum_{j=0}^{k-2} ln(1-j/n) le -sum_{j=1}^{k-2} j/n = - frac{(k-1)(k-2)}{2n}.$$
    All in all, we see for $n ge 2M-4$ that (1) can be bounded below by
    $$frac{1}{2} sum_{k=lfloor n/2+2 rfloor +1}^n exp[-exp {-(k-1)(k-2)/(2n)}].$$
    and this is bounded by
    $$ frac{n}{2} exp(- exp{-n/8}) rightarrow infty.$$






    share|cite|improve this answer














    The Bernoulli numbers are defined
    $$frac{z}{e^z-1} = sum_{k=0}^infty frac{B_k}{k!}z^k$$
    and this is a holomorphic function on the domain defined by $|mathrm{Im}(z)| < 2pi$. Thus the radius of convergence is $2 pi$. Any power seriers is absolutely convergent in the radius of convergence.



    Here, for example we know that $|frac{B_k}{k!} 2^k| leq 1$ for all $k ge N$ and some $N in mathbb{N}$, because the series is convergent for $z=2$. Thus
    $$sum_{k=N}^n frac{|B_k|}{k!} = sum_{k=N}^n frac{1}{2^k} le 1. $$
    In other words: The series is absolute convergent and this can be used in order to show the claim (by using the dominated convergence theorem).



    Second answer: The sum $sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1})$ isn't convergent, i.e. you have you use a better bound for $|B_k|/k!$ in order to get that the series is convergent. We use $1-x ge e^{-x}/2$ for $0 <x le 1/2$ to get
    $$tag{1}sum_{k=M+1}^n (1-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}) ge frac{1}{2} sum_{kge n/2+2}^n exp(-n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}),$$
    where we used that
    $$n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1} = prod_{j=0}^{k-2} (1-j/n) le Big(1-frac{k-2}{n}Big)$$
    is at most $1/2$ if $k ge n/2+2$. Now note that $ln(1-x) le -x$ for all $x ge 0$ to obtain also the lower bound
    $$ ln (n^{underline{k-1}}/n^{k-1}) = sum_{j=0}^{k-2} ln(1-j/n) le -sum_{j=1}^{k-2} j/n = - frac{(k-1)(k-2)}{2n}.$$
    All in all, we see for $n ge 2M-4$ that (1) can be bounded below by
    $$frac{1}{2} sum_{k=lfloor n/2+2 rfloor +1}^n exp[-exp {-(k-1)(k-2)/(2n)}].$$
    and this is bounded by
    $$ frac{n}{2} exp(- exp{-n/8}) rightarrow infty.$$







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited 19 hours ago

























    answered yesterday









    p4sch

    3,465216




    3,465216








    • 1




      $|B_k 2^k /k! | le 1$ is nothing else than $|B_k/k!| le 2^{-k}$.
      – p4sch
      yesterday










    • in your second answer you are saying that $|n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}|<1/2$, but this is relative to the value of $k$ and $n$, so you cant make the lower bound on $(1)$ because $n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}to 1$ as $ntoinfty$ for fixed $k$
      – Masacroso
      yesterday












    • $k$ is not fixed, since we sum over $k=M+1$ up to $k=n$. I repaired my answer. You just need to skip sum summands and begin to sum at $k ge n/2+2$.
      – p4sch
      19 hours ago
















    • 1




      $|B_k 2^k /k! | le 1$ is nothing else than $|B_k/k!| le 2^{-k}$.
      – p4sch
      yesterday










    • in your second answer you are saying that $|n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}|<1/2$, but this is relative to the value of $k$ and $n$, so you cant make the lower bound on $(1)$ because $n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}to 1$ as $ntoinfty$ for fixed $k$
      – Masacroso
      yesterday












    • $k$ is not fixed, since we sum over $k=M+1$ up to $k=n$. I repaired my answer. You just need to skip sum summands and begin to sum at $k ge n/2+2$.
      – p4sch
      19 hours ago










    1




    1




    $|B_k 2^k /k! | le 1$ is nothing else than $|B_k/k!| le 2^{-k}$.
    – p4sch
    yesterday




    $|B_k 2^k /k! | le 1$ is nothing else than $|B_k/k!| le 2^{-k}$.
    – p4sch
    yesterday












    in your second answer you are saying that $|n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}|<1/2$, but this is relative to the value of $k$ and $n$, so you cant make the lower bound on $(1)$ because $n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}to 1$ as $ntoinfty$ for fixed $k$
    – Masacroso
    yesterday






    in your second answer you are saying that $|n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}|<1/2$, but this is relative to the value of $k$ and $n$, so you cant make the lower bound on $(1)$ because $n^underline{k-1}/n^{k-1}to 1$ as $ntoinfty$ for fixed $k$
    – Masacroso
    yesterday














    $k$ is not fixed, since we sum over $k=M+1$ up to $k=n$. I repaired my answer. You just need to skip sum summands and begin to sum at $k ge n/2+2$.
    – p4sch
    19 hours ago






    $k$ is not fixed, since we sum over $k=M+1$ up to $k=n$. I repaired my answer. You just need to skip sum summands and begin to sum at $k ge n/2+2$.
    – p4sch
    19 hours ago












    up vote
    0
    down vote













    I find a solution using the recursion



    $$B_k=-sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k}jfrac{B_j}{k-1+j}tag1$$



    and the dominated convergence theorem. From $(1)$ and setting $M:=sup_{kinBbb N}|B_k|/k!$ (what is finite because I know that $sum_{k=1}^infty B_k/k!$ converges) then we have that



    $$begin{align}left|frac{B_k}{k!}right|&=left|frac1{k!}sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k}jfrac{B_j}{k-j+1}right|=left|sum_{j=0}^{k-1}frac{B_j}{j!}frac1{(k-j+1)!}right|\
    &lefrac{M k}{(k-1)!}sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k-1}j
    =frac{Mk}{(k-1)!}2^{k-1}\&=2kMprod_{j=0}^{k-4}frac2{k-1-j}end{align}tag2$$



    Then it is easy to check that for $kge 6$ we have that $frac{|B_k|}{k!}le 16Mfrac{k}{(k-3)^3}$, so by the integral test the series $sum_{k=1}^infty |B_k|/k!$ converges.



    Now using the first approach on the question we can apply the dominated convergence theorem and find that



    $$lim_{ntoinfty}sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}cdotfrac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}=lim_{ntoinfty}int_{Bbb N_{ge 1}}a_n(k) ,dmathcal H^0=int_{Bbb N_{ge 1}}frac{B_k}{k!},dmathcal H^0=sum_{k=1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}tag3$$



    as desired. However I would like to see, if possible, a more simple solution that doesn't use "advanced" theorems as the dominated convergence theorem.



    P.S.: $dmathcal H^0$ is just the counting measure.





    Essentially the same question appear in a mathematical magazine. In short it says that $n^underline{k-1}in n^{k-1}+O(n^{k-2})$ as $ntoinfty$, thus $frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}in 1+O(n^{-1})$ and we find that



    $$sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}cdotfrac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}in sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}+O(n^{-1})sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}tag4$$



    Then in the article the author take limits on $(4)$, "giving" the wanted identity. However this procedure seems wrong as its said in the last link. I added this to the answer for the curious reader.






    share|cite|improve this answer



























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      I find a solution using the recursion



      $$B_k=-sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k}jfrac{B_j}{k-1+j}tag1$$



      and the dominated convergence theorem. From $(1)$ and setting $M:=sup_{kinBbb N}|B_k|/k!$ (what is finite because I know that $sum_{k=1}^infty B_k/k!$ converges) then we have that



      $$begin{align}left|frac{B_k}{k!}right|&=left|frac1{k!}sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k}jfrac{B_j}{k-j+1}right|=left|sum_{j=0}^{k-1}frac{B_j}{j!}frac1{(k-j+1)!}right|\
      &lefrac{M k}{(k-1)!}sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k-1}j
      =frac{Mk}{(k-1)!}2^{k-1}\&=2kMprod_{j=0}^{k-4}frac2{k-1-j}end{align}tag2$$



      Then it is easy to check that for $kge 6$ we have that $frac{|B_k|}{k!}le 16Mfrac{k}{(k-3)^3}$, so by the integral test the series $sum_{k=1}^infty |B_k|/k!$ converges.



      Now using the first approach on the question we can apply the dominated convergence theorem and find that



      $$lim_{ntoinfty}sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}cdotfrac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}=lim_{ntoinfty}int_{Bbb N_{ge 1}}a_n(k) ,dmathcal H^0=int_{Bbb N_{ge 1}}frac{B_k}{k!},dmathcal H^0=sum_{k=1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}tag3$$



      as desired. However I would like to see, if possible, a more simple solution that doesn't use "advanced" theorems as the dominated convergence theorem.



      P.S.: $dmathcal H^0$ is just the counting measure.





      Essentially the same question appear in a mathematical magazine. In short it says that $n^underline{k-1}in n^{k-1}+O(n^{k-2})$ as $ntoinfty$, thus $frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}in 1+O(n^{-1})$ and we find that



      $$sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}cdotfrac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}in sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}+O(n^{-1})sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}tag4$$



      Then in the article the author take limits on $(4)$, "giving" the wanted identity. However this procedure seems wrong as its said in the last link. I added this to the answer for the curious reader.






      share|cite|improve this answer

























        up vote
        0
        down vote










        up vote
        0
        down vote









        I find a solution using the recursion



        $$B_k=-sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k}jfrac{B_j}{k-1+j}tag1$$



        and the dominated convergence theorem. From $(1)$ and setting $M:=sup_{kinBbb N}|B_k|/k!$ (what is finite because I know that $sum_{k=1}^infty B_k/k!$ converges) then we have that



        $$begin{align}left|frac{B_k}{k!}right|&=left|frac1{k!}sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k}jfrac{B_j}{k-j+1}right|=left|sum_{j=0}^{k-1}frac{B_j}{j!}frac1{(k-j+1)!}right|\
        &lefrac{M k}{(k-1)!}sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k-1}j
        =frac{Mk}{(k-1)!}2^{k-1}\&=2kMprod_{j=0}^{k-4}frac2{k-1-j}end{align}tag2$$



        Then it is easy to check that for $kge 6$ we have that $frac{|B_k|}{k!}le 16Mfrac{k}{(k-3)^3}$, so by the integral test the series $sum_{k=1}^infty |B_k|/k!$ converges.



        Now using the first approach on the question we can apply the dominated convergence theorem and find that



        $$lim_{ntoinfty}sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}cdotfrac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}=lim_{ntoinfty}int_{Bbb N_{ge 1}}a_n(k) ,dmathcal H^0=int_{Bbb N_{ge 1}}frac{B_k}{k!},dmathcal H^0=sum_{k=1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}tag3$$



        as desired. However I would like to see, if possible, a more simple solution that doesn't use "advanced" theorems as the dominated convergence theorem.



        P.S.: $dmathcal H^0$ is just the counting measure.





        Essentially the same question appear in a mathematical magazine. In short it says that $n^underline{k-1}in n^{k-1}+O(n^{k-2})$ as $ntoinfty$, thus $frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}in 1+O(n^{-1})$ and we find that



        $$sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}cdotfrac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}in sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}+O(n^{-1})sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}tag4$$



        Then in the article the author take limits on $(4)$, "giving" the wanted identity. However this procedure seems wrong as its said in the last link. I added this to the answer for the curious reader.






        share|cite|improve this answer














        I find a solution using the recursion



        $$B_k=-sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k}jfrac{B_j}{k-1+j}tag1$$



        and the dominated convergence theorem. From $(1)$ and setting $M:=sup_{kinBbb N}|B_k|/k!$ (what is finite because I know that $sum_{k=1}^infty B_k/k!$ converges) then we have that



        $$begin{align}left|frac{B_k}{k!}right|&=left|frac1{k!}sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k}jfrac{B_j}{k-j+1}right|=left|sum_{j=0}^{k-1}frac{B_j}{j!}frac1{(k-j+1)!}right|\
        &lefrac{M k}{(k-1)!}sum_{j=0}^{k-1}binom{k-1}j
        =frac{Mk}{(k-1)!}2^{k-1}\&=2kMprod_{j=0}^{k-4}frac2{k-1-j}end{align}tag2$$



        Then it is easy to check that for $kge 6$ we have that $frac{|B_k|}{k!}le 16Mfrac{k}{(k-3)^3}$, so by the integral test the series $sum_{k=1}^infty |B_k|/k!$ converges.



        Now using the first approach on the question we can apply the dominated convergence theorem and find that



        $$lim_{ntoinfty}sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}cdotfrac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}=lim_{ntoinfty}int_{Bbb N_{ge 1}}a_n(k) ,dmathcal H^0=int_{Bbb N_{ge 1}}frac{B_k}{k!},dmathcal H^0=sum_{k=1}^inftyfrac{B_k}{k!}tag3$$



        as desired. However I would like to see, if possible, a more simple solution that doesn't use "advanced" theorems as the dominated convergence theorem.



        P.S.: $dmathcal H^0$ is just the counting measure.





        Essentially the same question appear in a mathematical magazine. In short it says that $n^underline{k-1}in n^{k-1}+O(n^{k-2})$ as $ntoinfty$, thus $frac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}in 1+O(n^{-1})$ and we find that



        $$sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}cdotfrac{n^underline{k-1}}{n^{k-1}}in sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}+O(n^{-1})sum_{k=1}^{n+1}frac{B_k}{k!}tag4$$



        Then in the article the author take limits on $(4)$, "giving" the wanted identity. However this procedure seems wrong as its said in the last link. I added this to the answer for the curious reader.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited yesterday

























        answered yesterday









        Masacroso

        12.2k41746




        12.2k41746






























             

            draft saved


            draft discarded



















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3004849%2fshow-that-lim-n-sum-k-1n-fracb-kk-fracn-underlinek-1nk-1%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

            Wiesbaden

            Marschland

            Dieringhausen