Verification of $lim_{n rightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n^3}=1$ [duplicate]











up vote
0
down vote

favorite













This question already has an answer here:




  • Proof that $lim_{nrightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n}=1$

    6 answers




I am interested in the limit




$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n^3}$$




Can we simply conclude that:
$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} (sqrt[n]{n})^3= 1^3=1.$$
I have proven that $sqrt[n]{n}rightarrow1$ earlier in this textbook. Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit.










share|cite|improve this question















marked as duplicate by Nosrati, Community 20 hours ago


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.











  • 1




    Yes, if you already know $sqrt[n]nto 1$
    – Hagen von Eitzen
    Nov 21 at 21:08










  • This is a lemma the book had us prove earlier, also the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 21 at 21:08












  • Please include some text in your title besides just mathjax formatting.
    – amWhy
    Nov 21 at 21:13










  • Thanks Hagen, I do now that :)
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 21 at 21:18










  • "Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit." Has that been proven? If so... you are good. If not, you must justify it (it is true by the way).
    – fleablood
    Nov 21 at 22:19















up vote
0
down vote

favorite













This question already has an answer here:




  • Proof that $lim_{nrightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n}=1$

    6 answers




I am interested in the limit




$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n^3}$$




Can we simply conclude that:
$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} (sqrt[n]{n})^3= 1^3=1.$$
I have proven that $sqrt[n]{n}rightarrow1$ earlier in this textbook. Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit.










share|cite|improve this question















marked as duplicate by Nosrati, Community 20 hours ago


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.











  • 1




    Yes, if you already know $sqrt[n]nto 1$
    – Hagen von Eitzen
    Nov 21 at 21:08










  • This is a lemma the book had us prove earlier, also the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 21 at 21:08












  • Please include some text in your title besides just mathjax formatting.
    – amWhy
    Nov 21 at 21:13










  • Thanks Hagen, I do now that :)
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 21 at 21:18










  • "Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit." Has that been proven? If so... you are good. If not, you must justify it (it is true by the way).
    – fleablood
    Nov 21 at 22:19













up vote
0
down vote

favorite









up vote
0
down vote

favorite












This question already has an answer here:




  • Proof that $lim_{nrightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n}=1$

    6 answers




I am interested in the limit




$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n^3}$$




Can we simply conclude that:
$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} (sqrt[n]{n})^3= 1^3=1.$$
I have proven that $sqrt[n]{n}rightarrow1$ earlier in this textbook. Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit.










share|cite|improve this question
















This question already has an answer here:




  • Proof that $lim_{nrightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n}=1$

    6 answers




I am interested in the limit




$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n^3}$$




Can we simply conclude that:
$$ lim_{n rightarrow infty} (sqrt[n]{n})^3= 1^3=1.$$
I have proven that $sqrt[n]{n}rightarrow1$ earlier in this textbook. Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit.





This question already has an answer here:




  • Proof that $lim_{nrightarrow infty} sqrt[n]{n}=1$

    6 answers








real-analysis limits






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 21 at 21:14









amWhy

191k27223437




191k27223437










asked Nov 21 at 21:06









WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo

960321




960321




marked as duplicate by Nosrati, Community 20 hours ago


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.






marked as duplicate by Nosrati, Community 20 hours ago


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.










  • 1




    Yes, if you already know $sqrt[n]nto 1$
    – Hagen von Eitzen
    Nov 21 at 21:08










  • This is a lemma the book had us prove earlier, also the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 21 at 21:08












  • Please include some text in your title besides just mathjax formatting.
    – amWhy
    Nov 21 at 21:13










  • Thanks Hagen, I do now that :)
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 21 at 21:18










  • "Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit." Has that been proven? If so... you are good. If not, you must justify it (it is true by the way).
    – fleablood
    Nov 21 at 22:19














  • 1




    Yes, if you already know $sqrt[n]nto 1$
    – Hagen von Eitzen
    Nov 21 at 21:08










  • This is a lemma the book had us prove earlier, also the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 21 at 21:08












  • Please include some text in your title besides just mathjax formatting.
    – amWhy
    Nov 21 at 21:13










  • Thanks Hagen, I do now that :)
    – WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
    Nov 21 at 21:18










  • "Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit." Has that been proven? If so... you are good. If not, you must justify it (it is true by the way).
    – fleablood
    Nov 21 at 22:19








1




1




Yes, if you already know $sqrt[n]nto 1$
– Hagen von Eitzen
Nov 21 at 21:08




Yes, if you already know $sqrt[n]nto 1$
– Hagen von Eitzen
Nov 21 at 21:08












This is a lemma the book had us prove earlier, also the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 21 at 21:08






This is a lemma the book had us prove earlier, also the limit of a power is the power of the limit.
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 21 at 21:08














Please include some text in your title besides just mathjax formatting.
– amWhy
Nov 21 at 21:13




Please include some text in your title besides just mathjax formatting.
– amWhy
Nov 21 at 21:13












Thanks Hagen, I do now that :)
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 21 at 21:18




Thanks Hagen, I do now that :)
– WesleyGroupshaveFeelingsToo
Nov 21 at 21:18












"Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit." Has that been proven? If so... you are good. If not, you must justify it (it is true by the way).
– fleablood
Nov 21 at 22:19




"Also since the limit of a power is the power of the limit." Has that been proven? If so... you are good. If not, you must justify it (it is true by the way).
– fleablood
Nov 21 at 22:19










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
2
down vote



accepted










Yes, we can simply do that. Since the exponent $^3$ is a constant neutral number (meaning we may interpret it as a fixed number of multiplications) we can move the limit inside of it. So if you already know $lim_{ntoinfty}sqrt[n]n=1$ then that's a full proof.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • This answer is insufficient. It is not enough to state that the exponent is constant. An essential property is missing.
    – Yves Daoust
    Nov 22 at 10:06












  • @YvesDaoust Raising to the power of a constant is continuous around $1$?
    – Arthur
    Nov 22 at 10:46










  • This is precisely the missing property. By the way, even a variable exponent would yield a continuous function.
    – Yves Daoust
    Nov 22 at 14:37












  • @YvesDaoust Sure you can do it with a variable exponent as well, but then you have to be extra careful. You can't put the limit inside of, say, $sqrt[n]{n}^n$ and expect to get a sensible answer. You need a constant exponent for that (or at least an exponent converging to a nice value). And I could argue for this without continuity of exponentiation at all. Just using that $sqrt[n]{n}^3 = sqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}$, and you can take the limits of those separately (something which is usually proven quite early and taken as implicit).
    – Arthur
    Nov 22 at 14:40












  • What I mean is that "since the exponent $^3$ is constant" is not the reason.
    – Yves Daoust
    Nov 22 at 15:00


















up vote
2
down vote













Yes we are allowed to do that since for continuity



$$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)=Lin mathbb{R} implies lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)]^k=left[lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)right]^k=L^k$$



Indeed in that particular case since $sqrt[n]{n}to 1$



$$forall epsilon>0 quad exists bar n quad forall n>bar n quad |sqrt[n]{n}-1|<epsilon$$



we have that, assuming $sqrt[n]{n}<2$, $forall bar epsilon=7epsilon>0$



$$|(sqrt[n]{n})^3-1|=|sqrt[n]{n}-1|cdot |sqrt[n]{n^2}+sqrt[n]{n}+1|< 7epsilon=bar epsilon quad forall n>bar n$$



and then $(sqrt[n]{n})^3to 1$.






share|cite|improve this answer



















  • 1




    You would need this to be an "if and only if" for this to apply here.
    – Will Sherwood
    Nov 21 at 21:15










  • @WillSherwood Yes but in that case the asker was interested in that particular implication. Do you think that this is the motivation for the downvoting? Thanks
    – gimusi
    Nov 21 at 21:24


















up vote
2
down vote













You know that
$sqrt[n]{n}
to 1$
.



Also
$sqrt[n]{n^k}
=(sqrt[n]{n})^k
$

so



$begin{array}\
sqrt[n]{n^k}-1
&=(sqrt[n]{n})^k-1\
&=(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j\
text{so}\
|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)||sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
&le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^n|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |n|\
&=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|kn\
end{array}
$



Therefore,
to make
$|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
le epsilon$
,
choose $n$ large enough
so that
$|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|
le frac{epsilon}{kn}
$
.






share|cite|improve this answer




























    up vote
    2
    down vote













    You can if you know four things.



    1) If $f$ is continuous and $a_n to M$ and for all $a_n$ that $f(a_n)$ is defined and $f(M)$ is defined then $a_nto M$ means $f(a_n) to f(M)$.



    But you DO have to prove this sometime. I'm sure your text has proven that somewhere.



    And



    2) you need to know that $sqrt[n]{n} to 1$.



    But you claim you have already shown that.



    And 3) that $sqrt[n]{n^3} = (sqrt[n]{n})^3$.



    Which is basic. It follows that as for all $M > 0$ and $nin mathbb N$ there is a unique $k = sqrt[n]{M}$ so that $k^n = M$. And as $(k^j)^n= (k^n)^j = M^j; for j in mathbb N$ it follows that $(sqrt[n]{M})^j= sqrt[n]{M^3}$.



    And finally you need to know 4) that $()^3: mathbb R to mathbb R$ is continuous.



    Which is .... basic. But you should have proven that sometime.



    So $lim sqrt[n]{n^3} = lim (sqrt[n]{n})^3 = (lim sqrt[n]{n})^3 = 1^3 =1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer




























      up vote
      2
      down vote













      Yes, because the cubic root function is continuous, so that you can swap the limit and the root.





      Continuity at $1$ is ensured by the fact that



      $$|sqrt[3]{1+delta}-1|=left|frac{delta}{(sqrt[3]{1+delta})^2+sqrt[3]{1+delta}+1}right|<fracdelta3<epsilon$$ holds with $delta<3epsilon$.






      share|cite|improve this answer






























        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes








        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes








        up vote
        2
        down vote



        accepted










        Yes, we can simply do that. Since the exponent $^3$ is a constant neutral number (meaning we may interpret it as a fixed number of multiplications) we can move the limit inside of it. So if you already know $lim_{ntoinfty}sqrt[n]n=1$ then that's a full proof.






        share|cite|improve this answer























        • This answer is insufficient. It is not enough to state that the exponent is constant. An essential property is missing.
          – Yves Daoust
          Nov 22 at 10:06












        • @YvesDaoust Raising to the power of a constant is continuous around $1$?
          – Arthur
          Nov 22 at 10:46










        • This is precisely the missing property. By the way, even a variable exponent would yield a continuous function.
          – Yves Daoust
          Nov 22 at 14:37












        • @YvesDaoust Sure you can do it with a variable exponent as well, but then you have to be extra careful. You can't put the limit inside of, say, $sqrt[n]{n}^n$ and expect to get a sensible answer. You need a constant exponent for that (or at least an exponent converging to a nice value). And I could argue for this without continuity of exponentiation at all. Just using that $sqrt[n]{n}^3 = sqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}$, and you can take the limits of those separately (something which is usually proven quite early and taken as implicit).
          – Arthur
          Nov 22 at 14:40












        • What I mean is that "since the exponent $^3$ is constant" is not the reason.
          – Yves Daoust
          Nov 22 at 15:00















        up vote
        2
        down vote



        accepted










        Yes, we can simply do that. Since the exponent $^3$ is a constant neutral number (meaning we may interpret it as a fixed number of multiplications) we can move the limit inside of it. So if you already know $lim_{ntoinfty}sqrt[n]n=1$ then that's a full proof.






        share|cite|improve this answer























        • This answer is insufficient. It is not enough to state that the exponent is constant. An essential property is missing.
          – Yves Daoust
          Nov 22 at 10:06












        • @YvesDaoust Raising to the power of a constant is continuous around $1$?
          – Arthur
          Nov 22 at 10:46










        • This is precisely the missing property. By the way, even a variable exponent would yield a continuous function.
          – Yves Daoust
          Nov 22 at 14:37












        • @YvesDaoust Sure you can do it with a variable exponent as well, but then you have to be extra careful. You can't put the limit inside of, say, $sqrt[n]{n}^n$ and expect to get a sensible answer. You need a constant exponent for that (or at least an exponent converging to a nice value). And I could argue for this without continuity of exponentiation at all. Just using that $sqrt[n]{n}^3 = sqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}$, and you can take the limits of those separately (something which is usually proven quite early and taken as implicit).
          – Arthur
          Nov 22 at 14:40












        • What I mean is that "since the exponent $^3$ is constant" is not the reason.
          – Yves Daoust
          Nov 22 at 15:00













        up vote
        2
        down vote



        accepted







        up vote
        2
        down vote



        accepted






        Yes, we can simply do that. Since the exponent $^3$ is a constant neutral number (meaning we may interpret it as a fixed number of multiplications) we can move the limit inside of it. So if you already know $lim_{ntoinfty}sqrt[n]n=1$ then that's a full proof.






        share|cite|improve this answer














        Yes, we can simply do that. Since the exponent $^3$ is a constant neutral number (meaning we may interpret it as a fixed number of multiplications) we can move the limit inside of it. So if you already know $lim_{ntoinfty}sqrt[n]n=1$ then that's a full proof.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Nov 22 at 15:13

























        answered Nov 21 at 21:08









        Arthur

        108k7103186




        108k7103186












        • This answer is insufficient. It is not enough to state that the exponent is constant. An essential property is missing.
          – Yves Daoust
          Nov 22 at 10:06












        • @YvesDaoust Raising to the power of a constant is continuous around $1$?
          – Arthur
          Nov 22 at 10:46










        • This is precisely the missing property. By the way, even a variable exponent would yield a continuous function.
          – Yves Daoust
          Nov 22 at 14:37












        • @YvesDaoust Sure you can do it with a variable exponent as well, but then you have to be extra careful. You can't put the limit inside of, say, $sqrt[n]{n}^n$ and expect to get a sensible answer. You need a constant exponent for that (or at least an exponent converging to a nice value). And I could argue for this without continuity of exponentiation at all. Just using that $sqrt[n]{n}^3 = sqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}$, and you can take the limits of those separately (something which is usually proven quite early and taken as implicit).
          – Arthur
          Nov 22 at 14:40












        • What I mean is that "since the exponent $^3$ is constant" is not the reason.
          – Yves Daoust
          Nov 22 at 15:00


















        • This answer is insufficient. It is not enough to state that the exponent is constant. An essential property is missing.
          – Yves Daoust
          Nov 22 at 10:06












        • @YvesDaoust Raising to the power of a constant is continuous around $1$?
          – Arthur
          Nov 22 at 10:46










        • This is precisely the missing property. By the way, even a variable exponent would yield a continuous function.
          – Yves Daoust
          Nov 22 at 14:37












        • @YvesDaoust Sure you can do it with a variable exponent as well, but then you have to be extra careful. You can't put the limit inside of, say, $sqrt[n]{n}^n$ and expect to get a sensible answer. You need a constant exponent for that (or at least an exponent converging to a nice value). And I could argue for this without continuity of exponentiation at all. Just using that $sqrt[n]{n}^3 = sqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}$, and you can take the limits of those separately (something which is usually proven quite early and taken as implicit).
          – Arthur
          Nov 22 at 14:40












        • What I mean is that "since the exponent $^3$ is constant" is not the reason.
          – Yves Daoust
          Nov 22 at 15:00
















        This answer is insufficient. It is not enough to state that the exponent is constant. An essential property is missing.
        – Yves Daoust
        Nov 22 at 10:06






        This answer is insufficient. It is not enough to state that the exponent is constant. An essential property is missing.
        – Yves Daoust
        Nov 22 at 10:06














        @YvesDaoust Raising to the power of a constant is continuous around $1$?
        – Arthur
        Nov 22 at 10:46




        @YvesDaoust Raising to the power of a constant is continuous around $1$?
        – Arthur
        Nov 22 at 10:46












        This is precisely the missing property. By the way, even a variable exponent would yield a continuous function.
        – Yves Daoust
        Nov 22 at 14:37






        This is precisely the missing property. By the way, even a variable exponent would yield a continuous function.
        – Yves Daoust
        Nov 22 at 14:37














        @YvesDaoust Sure you can do it with a variable exponent as well, but then you have to be extra careful. You can't put the limit inside of, say, $sqrt[n]{n}^n$ and expect to get a sensible answer. You need a constant exponent for that (or at least an exponent converging to a nice value). And I could argue for this without continuity of exponentiation at all. Just using that $sqrt[n]{n}^3 = sqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}$, and you can take the limits of those separately (something which is usually proven quite early and taken as implicit).
        – Arthur
        Nov 22 at 14:40






        @YvesDaoust Sure you can do it with a variable exponent as well, but then you have to be extra careful. You can't put the limit inside of, say, $sqrt[n]{n}^n$ and expect to get a sensible answer. You need a constant exponent for that (or at least an exponent converging to a nice value). And I could argue for this without continuity of exponentiation at all. Just using that $sqrt[n]{n}^3 = sqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}cdotsqrt[n]{n}$, and you can take the limits of those separately (something which is usually proven quite early and taken as implicit).
        – Arthur
        Nov 22 at 14:40














        What I mean is that "since the exponent $^3$ is constant" is not the reason.
        – Yves Daoust
        Nov 22 at 15:00




        What I mean is that "since the exponent $^3$ is constant" is not the reason.
        – Yves Daoust
        Nov 22 at 15:00










        up vote
        2
        down vote













        Yes we are allowed to do that since for continuity



        $$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)=Lin mathbb{R} implies lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)]^k=left[lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)right]^k=L^k$$



        Indeed in that particular case since $sqrt[n]{n}to 1$



        $$forall epsilon>0 quad exists bar n quad forall n>bar n quad |sqrt[n]{n}-1|<epsilon$$



        we have that, assuming $sqrt[n]{n}<2$, $forall bar epsilon=7epsilon>0$



        $$|(sqrt[n]{n})^3-1|=|sqrt[n]{n}-1|cdot |sqrt[n]{n^2}+sqrt[n]{n}+1|< 7epsilon=bar epsilon quad forall n>bar n$$



        and then $(sqrt[n]{n})^3to 1$.






        share|cite|improve this answer



















        • 1




          You would need this to be an "if and only if" for this to apply here.
          – Will Sherwood
          Nov 21 at 21:15










        • @WillSherwood Yes but in that case the asker was interested in that particular implication. Do you think that this is the motivation for the downvoting? Thanks
          – gimusi
          Nov 21 at 21:24















        up vote
        2
        down vote













        Yes we are allowed to do that since for continuity



        $$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)=Lin mathbb{R} implies lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)]^k=left[lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)right]^k=L^k$$



        Indeed in that particular case since $sqrt[n]{n}to 1$



        $$forall epsilon>0 quad exists bar n quad forall n>bar n quad |sqrt[n]{n}-1|<epsilon$$



        we have that, assuming $sqrt[n]{n}<2$, $forall bar epsilon=7epsilon>0$



        $$|(sqrt[n]{n})^3-1|=|sqrt[n]{n}-1|cdot |sqrt[n]{n^2}+sqrt[n]{n}+1|< 7epsilon=bar epsilon quad forall n>bar n$$



        and then $(sqrt[n]{n})^3to 1$.






        share|cite|improve this answer



















        • 1




          You would need this to be an "if and only if" for this to apply here.
          – Will Sherwood
          Nov 21 at 21:15










        • @WillSherwood Yes but in that case the asker was interested in that particular implication. Do you think that this is the motivation for the downvoting? Thanks
          – gimusi
          Nov 21 at 21:24













        up vote
        2
        down vote










        up vote
        2
        down vote









        Yes we are allowed to do that since for continuity



        $$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)=Lin mathbb{R} implies lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)]^k=left[lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)right]^k=L^k$$



        Indeed in that particular case since $sqrt[n]{n}to 1$



        $$forall epsilon>0 quad exists bar n quad forall n>bar n quad |sqrt[n]{n}-1|<epsilon$$



        we have that, assuming $sqrt[n]{n}<2$, $forall bar epsilon=7epsilon>0$



        $$|(sqrt[n]{n})^3-1|=|sqrt[n]{n}-1|cdot |sqrt[n]{n^2}+sqrt[n]{n}+1|< 7epsilon=bar epsilon quad forall n>bar n$$



        and then $(sqrt[n]{n})^3to 1$.






        share|cite|improve this answer














        Yes we are allowed to do that since for continuity



        $$lim_{xto x_0} f(x)=Lin mathbb{R} implies lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)]^k=left[lim_{xto x_0} [f(x)right]^k=L^k$$



        Indeed in that particular case since $sqrt[n]{n}to 1$



        $$forall epsilon>0 quad exists bar n quad forall n>bar n quad |sqrt[n]{n}-1|<epsilon$$



        we have that, assuming $sqrt[n]{n}<2$, $forall bar epsilon=7epsilon>0$



        $$|(sqrt[n]{n})^3-1|=|sqrt[n]{n}-1|cdot |sqrt[n]{n^2}+sqrt[n]{n}+1|< 7epsilon=bar epsilon quad forall n>bar n$$



        and then $(sqrt[n]{n})^3to 1$.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Nov 21 at 21:36

























        answered Nov 21 at 21:10









        gimusi

        87.1k74393




        87.1k74393








        • 1




          You would need this to be an "if and only if" for this to apply here.
          – Will Sherwood
          Nov 21 at 21:15










        • @WillSherwood Yes but in that case the asker was interested in that particular implication. Do you think that this is the motivation for the downvoting? Thanks
          – gimusi
          Nov 21 at 21:24














        • 1




          You would need this to be an "if and only if" for this to apply here.
          – Will Sherwood
          Nov 21 at 21:15










        • @WillSherwood Yes but in that case the asker was interested in that particular implication. Do you think that this is the motivation for the downvoting? Thanks
          – gimusi
          Nov 21 at 21:24








        1




        1




        You would need this to be an "if and only if" for this to apply here.
        – Will Sherwood
        Nov 21 at 21:15




        You would need this to be an "if and only if" for this to apply here.
        – Will Sherwood
        Nov 21 at 21:15












        @WillSherwood Yes but in that case the asker was interested in that particular implication. Do you think that this is the motivation for the downvoting? Thanks
        – gimusi
        Nov 21 at 21:24




        @WillSherwood Yes but in that case the asker was interested in that particular implication. Do you think that this is the motivation for the downvoting? Thanks
        – gimusi
        Nov 21 at 21:24










        up vote
        2
        down vote













        You know that
        $sqrt[n]{n}
        to 1$
        .



        Also
        $sqrt[n]{n^k}
        =(sqrt[n]{n})^k
        $

        so



        $begin{array}\
        sqrt[n]{n^k}-1
        &=(sqrt[n]{n})^k-1\
        &=(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j\
        text{so}\
        |sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
        &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
        &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)||sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
        &le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
        &le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^n|\
        &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |n|\
        &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|kn\
        end{array}
        $



        Therefore,
        to make
        $|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
        le epsilon$
        ,
        choose $n$ large enough
        so that
        $|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|
        le frac{epsilon}{kn}
        $
        .






        share|cite|improve this answer

























          up vote
          2
          down vote













          You know that
          $sqrt[n]{n}
          to 1$
          .



          Also
          $sqrt[n]{n^k}
          =(sqrt[n]{n})^k
          $

          so



          $begin{array}\
          sqrt[n]{n^k}-1
          &=(sqrt[n]{n})^k-1\
          &=(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j\
          text{so}\
          |sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
          &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
          &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)||sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
          &le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
          &le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^n|\
          &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |n|\
          &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|kn\
          end{array}
          $



          Therefore,
          to make
          $|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
          le epsilon$
          ,
          choose $n$ large enough
          so that
          $|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|
          le frac{epsilon}{kn}
          $
          .






          share|cite|improve this answer























            up vote
            2
            down vote










            up vote
            2
            down vote









            You know that
            $sqrt[n]{n}
            to 1$
            .



            Also
            $sqrt[n]{n^k}
            =(sqrt[n]{n})^k
            $

            so



            $begin{array}\
            sqrt[n]{n^k}-1
            &=(sqrt[n]{n})^k-1\
            &=(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j\
            text{so}\
            |sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
            &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
            &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)||sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
            &le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
            &le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^n|\
            &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |n|\
            &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|kn\
            end{array}
            $



            Therefore,
            to make
            $|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
            le epsilon$
            ,
            choose $n$ large enough
            so that
            $|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|
            le frac{epsilon}{kn}
            $
            .






            share|cite|improve this answer












            You know that
            $sqrt[n]{n}
            to 1$
            .



            Also
            $sqrt[n]{n^k}
            =(sqrt[n]{n})^k
            $

            so



            $begin{array}\
            sqrt[n]{n^k}-1
            &=(sqrt[n]{n})^k-1\
            &=(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j\
            text{so}\
            |sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
            &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
            &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)||sum_{j=0}^{k-1} sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
            &le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^j|\
            &le|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |sqrt[n]{n}^n|\
            &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|sum_{j=0}^{k-1} |n|\
            &=|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|kn\
            end{array}
            $



            Therefore,
            to make
            $|sqrt[n]{n^k}-1|
            le epsilon$
            ,
            choose $n$ large enough
            so that
            $|(sqrt[n]{n}-1)|
            le frac{epsilon}{kn}
            $
            .







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Nov 21 at 22:02









            marty cohen

            71.4k546123




            71.4k546123






















                up vote
                2
                down vote













                You can if you know four things.



                1) If $f$ is continuous and $a_n to M$ and for all $a_n$ that $f(a_n)$ is defined and $f(M)$ is defined then $a_nto M$ means $f(a_n) to f(M)$.



                But you DO have to prove this sometime. I'm sure your text has proven that somewhere.



                And



                2) you need to know that $sqrt[n]{n} to 1$.



                But you claim you have already shown that.



                And 3) that $sqrt[n]{n^3} = (sqrt[n]{n})^3$.



                Which is basic. It follows that as for all $M > 0$ and $nin mathbb N$ there is a unique $k = sqrt[n]{M}$ so that $k^n = M$. And as $(k^j)^n= (k^n)^j = M^j; for j in mathbb N$ it follows that $(sqrt[n]{M})^j= sqrt[n]{M^3}$.



                And finally you need to know 4) that $()^3: mathbb R to mathbb R$ is continuous.



                Which is .... basic. But you should have proven that sometime.



                So $lim sqrt[n]{n^3} = lim (sqrt[n]{n})^3 = (lim sqrt[n]{n})^3 = 1^3 =1$.






                share|cite|improve this answer

























                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote













                  You can if you know four things.



                  1) If $f$ is continuous and $a_n to M$ and for all $a_n$ that $f(a_n)$ is defined and $f(M)$ is defined then $a_nto M$ means $f(a_n) to f(M)$.



                  But you DO have to prove this sometime. I'm sure your text has proven that somewhere.



                  And



                  2) you need to know that $sqrt[n]{n} to 1$.



                  But you claim you have already shown that.



                  And 3) that $sqrt[n]{n^3} = (sqrt[n]{n})^3$.



                  Which is basic. It follows that as for all $M > 0$ and $nin mathbb N$ there is a unique $k = sqrt[n]{M}$ so that $k^n = M$. And as $(k^j)^n= (k^n)^j = M^j; for j in mathbb N$ it follows that $(sqrt[n]{M})^j= sqrt[n]{M^3}$.



                  And finally you need to know 4) that $()^3: mathbb R to mathbb R$ is continuous.



                  Which is .... basic. But you should have proven that sometime.



                  So $lim sqrt[n]{n^3} = lim (sqrt[n]{n})^3 = (lim sqrt[n]{n})^3 = 1^3 =1$.






                  share|cite|improve this answer























                    up vote
                    2
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    2
                    down vote









                    You can if you know four things.



                    1) If $f$ is continuous and $a_n to M$ and for all $a_n$ that $f(a_n)$ is defined and $f(M)$ is defined then $a_nto M$ means $f(a_n) to f(M)$.



                    But you DO have to prove this sometime. I'm sure your text has proven that somewhere.



                    And



                    2) you need to know that $sqrt[n]{n} to 1$.



                    But you claim you have already shown that.



                    And 3) that $sqrt[n]{n^3} = (sqrt[n]{n})^3$.



                    Which is basic. It follows that as for all $M > 0$ and $nin mathbb N$ there is a unique $k = sqrt[n]{M}$ so that $k^n = M$. And as $(k^j)^n= (k^n)^j = M^j; for j in mathbb N$ it follows that $(sqrt[n]{M})^j= sqrt[n]{M^3}$.



                    And finally you need to know 4) that $()^3: mathbb R to mathbb R$ is continuous.



                    Which is .... basic. But you should have proven that sometime.



                    So $lim sqrt[n]{n^3} = lim (sqrt[n]{n})^3 = (lim sqrt[n]{n})^3 = 1^3 =1$.






                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    You can if you know four things.



                    1) If $f$ is continuous and $a_n to M$ and for all $a_n$ that $f(a_n)$ is defined and $f(M)$ is defined then $a_nto M$ means $f(a_n) to f(M)$.



                    But you DO have to prove this sometime. I'm sure your text has proven that somewhere.



                    And



                    2) you need to know that $sqrt[n]{n} to 1$.



                    But you claim you have already shown that.



                    And 3) that $sqrt[n]{n^3} = (sqrt[n]{n})^3$.



                    Which is basic. It follows that as for all $M > 0$ and $nin mathbb N$ there is a unique $k = sqrt[n]{M}$ so that $k^n = M$. And as $(k^j)^n= (k^n)^j = M^j; for j in mathbb N$ it follows that $(sqrt[n]{M})^j= sqrt[n]{M^3}$.



                    And finally you need to know 4) that $()^3: mathbb R to mathbb R$ is continuous.



                    Which is .... basic. But you should have proven that sometime.



                    So $lim sqrt[n]{n^3} = lim (sqrt[n]{n})^3 = (lim sqrt[n]{n})^3 = 1^3 =1$.







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered Nov 21 at 22:18









                    fleablood

                    65.8k22682




                    65.8k22682






















                        up vote
                        2
                        down vote













                        Yes, because the cubic root function is continuous, so that you can swap the limit and the root.





                        Continuity at $1$ is ensured by the fact that



                        $$|sqrt[3]{1+delta}-1|=left|frac{delta}{(sqrt[3]{1+delta})^2+sqrt[3]{1+delta}+1}right|<fracdelta3<epsilon$$ holds with $delta<3epsilon$.






                        share|cite|improve this answer



























                          up vote
                          2
                          down vote













                          Yes, because the cubic root function is continuous, so that you can swap the limit and the root.





                          Continuity at $1$ is ensured by the fact that



                          $$|sqrt[3]{1+delta}-1|=left|frac{delta}{(sqrt[3]{1+delta})^2+sqrt[3]{1+delta}+1}right|<fracdelta3<epsilon$$ holds with $delta<3epsilon$.






                          share|cite|improve this answer

























                            up vote
                            2
                            down vote










                            up vote
                            2
                            down vote









                            Yes, because the cubic root function is continuous, so that you can swap the limit and the root.





                            Continuity at $1$ is ensured by the fact that



                            $$|sqrt[3]{1+delta}-1|=left|frac{delta}{(sqrt[3]{1+delta})^2+sqrt[3]{1+delta}+1}right|<fracdelta3<epsilon$$ holds with $delta<3epsilon$.






                            share|cite|improve this answer














                            Yes, because the cubic root function is continuous, so that you can swap the limit and the root.





                            Continuity at $1$ is ensured by the fact that



                            $$|sqrt[3]{1+delta}-1|=left|frac{delta}{(sqrt[3]{1+delta})^2+sqrt[3]{1+delta}+1}right|<fracdelta3<epsilon$$ holds with $delta<3epsilon$.







                            share|cite|improve this answer














                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer








                            edited Nov 22 at 8:07

























                            answered Nov 21 at 21:52









                            Yves Daoust

                            121k668217




                            121k668217















                                Popular posts from this blog

                                Sphinx de Gizeh

                                Dijon

                                Guerrita