38

I've spent the better part of this day trying to show from first principles that this sequence tends to 1. Could anyone give me an idea of how I can approach this problem?

$$ \lim_{n \to +\infty} n^{\frac{1}{n}} $$

Maciek
  • 447
  • I'm not quite sure which principles are "first", but the standard method here is to take the logarithm of the limit, use L'Hopital's Rule, and then exponentiate back. – Pete L. Clark Mar 03 '12 at 00:41
  • 2
    Try substituting $n = e^{\log n}$... – TMM Mar 03 '12 at 00:41
  • Ah, sorry for the confusion. Basically I'm "not allowed" to use L'Hopitals rule yet. Aside from the formal definition of a limit pretty much all I can use is direct comparison and ratio tests. – Maciek Mar 03 '12 at 00:50
  • 4
    Related (though I'm not sure about being a duplicate): http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/28348/proof-that-lim-n-rightarrow-infty-sqrtnn-1/28351#28351 – JavaMan Nov 19 '12 at 23:38
  • How does one say $n^{\frac{1}{n}}$ $>1$ – llecxe Apr 02 '21 at 19:06

13 Answers13

104

You can use $\text{AM} \ge \text{GM}$.

$$\frac{1 + 1 + \dots + 1 + \sqrt{n} + \sqrt{n}}{n} \ge n^{1/n} \ge 1$$

$$ 1 - \frac{2}{n} + \frac{2}{\sqrt{n}} \ge n^{1/n} \ge 1$$

Aryabhata
  • 82,206
19

Let $\epsilon>0$. Choose $N$ so that ${1\over N}<\epsilon$. Noting that ${ n+1 \over n}<1+\epsilon$ for $n\ge N$: $$ N+1\le N(1+\epsilon) $$ $$ N+2 \le (N+1)(1+\epsilon)\le N (1+\epsilon)^2 $$ $$ N+3 \le (N+2)(1+\epsilon)\le N (1+\epsilon)^3 $$ $$\vdots$$ $$\tag{1} N+k \le (N+k-1)(1+\epsilon) \le N(1+\epsilon)^k. $$ Using $(1)$, we have for $n\ge N$: $$ n=N+(n-N)\le (1+\epsilon)^{n-N}N; $$ which may be written as $$ n\le B (1+\epsilon)^n, $$ where $B=N/(1+\epsilon)^N$.

Thus, for $n\ge N$ we have $$\tag {2} \root n\of { n}\le B^{1/n}(1+\epsilon). $$ Since $\lim\limits_{n\rightarrow\infty} B^{1/n}=1$, it follows from $(2)$ that $\limsup\limits_{n\rightarrow\infty} \root n\of { n}\le 1+\epsilon$.

But, as $\epsilon$ was arbitrary, we must have $\limsup\limits_{n\rightarrow\infty} \root n\of {n}\le 1 $.

Since, obviously, $\liminf\limits_{n\rightarrow\infty} \root n\of {n}\ge 1 $, we have $\lim\limits_{n\rightarrow\infty} \root n\of {n}= 1 $, as desired.



One could also argue as follows:

Note $\root n\of n>1$ for $n>1$. For $n>1$, write $\root n\of n=1+c_n$ for some $c_n>0$. Then, by the Binonial Theorem we have, for $n>1$, $$\textstyle n=1 +nc_n+{1\over2} n(n-1)c_n^2+\cdots\ge 1+{1\over2}n(n-1)c_n^2; $$ whence $$ n-1\ge\textstyle {1\over2}n(n-1)c_n^2. $$ So, $c_n^2\le {2\over n}$ for $n>1$; whence $$ 0<\root n\of n -1=c_n\le \sqrt{2/n} $$ for $n>1$, and the result follows.

David Mitra
  • 74,748
  • This proof is really trustful since you have used only elementary operations which are usually proved this result. – checkmath Mar 03 '12 at 01:53
12

Fix $ \epsilon > 0 $. Then $\displaystyle \frac{(1+ \epsilon)^n}{n} \to \infty$ by the ratio test, so for all but a finite number of $n$ we have $ 1 < \displaystyle \frac{(1+ \epsilon)^n}{n},$ which can be rearranged to $\sqrt[n]{n} < 1+\epsilon .$ Thus $\sqrt[n]{n} \to 1.$

Ragib Zaman
  • 35,127
  • For your final “thus,” you need an additional hypothesis such as the fact that for all $n>1$, $\sqrt[n]{n}>1$. The fact that $a_n<L$ for all but a finite number of $n$ doesn’t imply that $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}a_n=L$, as can be seen by taking $a_n=0$, for example. – Steve Kass Mar 12 '14 at 23:43
9

Applying the Binomial Theorem, we can say $$ \begin{align} \left(1+\sqrt{\frac2n}\right)^n &\ge\color{#C00}{1}+\overbrace{\binom{n}{1}\sqrt{\frac2n}}^{\sqrt{2n}}+\overbrace{\ \binom{n}{2}\frac2n\ }^{\color{#C00}{n-1}}\tag{1a}\\[6pt] &\ge\color{#C00}{n}\tag{1b} \end{align} $$ Therefore, $$ 1\le n^{1/n}\le1+\sqrt{\frac2n}\tag2 $$ to which we can apply the Squeeze Theorem.

robjohn
  • 345,667
8

$$\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} n^{1/n} = \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} e^{\frac{1}{n} \ln n} = e^{\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{n} \ln n}$$

With L'Hôpital's rule you can prove that $\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{n} \ln {n} = 0$. Thus, $\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} n^{1/n} = e^0 = 1$.

Vortico
  • 1,633
  • I think u are using too much assumptions like continuity of $\ln t$ that need to be proved after this elementary proofs. – checkmath Mar 03 '12 at 01:32
6

Let's see a very elementary proof. Without loss of generality we proceed replacing $n$ by $2^n$ and get that: $$ 1\leq\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} n^{\frac{1}{n}}=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} {2^n}^{\frac{1}{{2}^{n}}}=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} {2}^{\frac{n}{{2}^{n}}}\leq\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} {2}^{\raise{4pt}\left.n\middle/\binom{n}{2}\right.}=2^0=1$$

By Squeeze Theorem the proof is complete.

robjohn
  • 345,667
user 1591719
  • 44,216
  • 12
  • 105
  • 255
  • 5
    If we want to replace sequence by subsequence in the above argument, maybe we should prove first that the sequence is monotone. (Or use some other argument that the limit exists.) The fact that this sequence is decreasing for $n\ge 3$ is mentioned as a hint here. – Martin Sleziak Jun 07 '12 at 09:26
  • BTW similar argument is given at PlanetMath - I found the link in comments in the other question. – Martin Sleziak Jun 07 '12 at 09:45
  • @Martin Sleziak: nice. I didn't know that a similar proof is to be found on PlanetMath. I usually try to post some unique solutions, my own solutions, but they are just apparently unique because it's possible to find them in elsewhere. :-) – user 1591719 Jun 07 '12 at 09:52
  • 1
    Uniqueness and all notwithstanding, this approach is incomplete for the reason explained by @MartinSleziak. – Did Oct 06 '15 at 16:53
  • @Did Right. Alternatively, having in mind a similar idea, we see that

    $$1\leq\ n^{\frac{1}{n}}\le (1+\epsilon)^{\sqrt{n}/n}, \ \epsilon>0$$ for some $n\ge n_0$. Taking the limit as $n \to \infty$ we're done.

    – user 1591719 Oct 06 '15 at 19:23
  • Or more generally $$1\leq\ n^{\frac{1}{n}}\le (1+\epsilon)^{n^{\large \eta-1}}, \ \epsilon>0, 1>\eta>0$$ – user 1591719 Oct 06 '15 at 19:31
3

Let $x_{n} = n^{\frac{1}{n}} - 1$. Then

$$ (x_{n}+1)^{n} = n.$$

By binomial expansion, you can deduce that

$$ x_{n} < \frac{2}{n-1}$$

which goes to zero and hence you have your result.

Vishal Gupta
  • 6,946
1

From binomial theorem, $(1+\epsilon)^n > (n(n-1)\epsilon^2)/2$ when $\epsilon > 0$. For any given small $\epsilon > 0$, when $n > 2/\epsilon^2 + 1$, $(1+\epsilon)^n > (n(n-1)\epsilon^2)/2 > n$, which means $n^{1/n} < 1 + \epsilon$.

Jerry
  • 11
  • 3
    In my view, you should provide some explanation. – 311411 Aug 26 '21 at 19:33
  • 3
    Please add further details to expand on your answer, such as working code or documentation citations. – Community Aug 26 '21 at 19:33
  • There is nothing new here that has not already been said. This is basically a variation of the answers by robjohn or DavidMitra above. In general, you should only provide answers that provide a new perspective or a new approach, not a rehash of existing answers. – PatrickR Aug 26 '21 at 21:25
1

It is totally basic and fun to do it this way:

We will prove that

$$\lim_{n \to \infty} \sqrt[n]{\frac{n}{2^n}} = \frac{1}{2}$$

from which your limit follows because

$$\lim_{n \to \infty} \sqrt[n]{\frac{1}{2^n}} = \frac{1}{2}$$

Replace $$n=2^{2^m}$$

$$\lim_{m \to \infty} \sqrt[2^{2^m}]{\frac{2^{2^m}}{2^{2^{2^m}}}} = \lim_{m \to \infty} \sqrt[2^{2^m}]{\frac{1}{2^{2^{2^m}-2^m}}} =$$

$$\lim_{m \to \infty} \frac{1}{2^{1-\frac{2^m}{2^{2^m}}}} = \lim_{m \to \infty} \frac{1}{2^{1-\frac1{2^{2^m-m}}}}$$

Now $\lim\limits_{m \to \infty} 2^m-m \to \infty$ because the difference between two successive terms $(2^{m+1}-(m+1))-(2^{m}-(m))=2^m-1$ tends to infinity meaning

$$\lim_{m \to \infty} 2^{2^m-m} = \infty $$ $$\lim_{m \to \infty} \frac1{2^{2^m-m}}=0$$

$$\lim_{m \to \infty} \frac{1}{2^{1-\frac1{2^{2^m-m}}}}=\frac{1}{2}$$

Your

$$\lim\limits_{n \to \infty} n^{\frac1{n}}=1$$ follows.

1

We know that

$$\liminf \frac{a_{n+1}}{a_n}\le \liminf (a_n)^{1/n}\le \limsup(a_n)^{1/n} \le \limsup \frac{a_{n+1}}{a_n}$$

if $(a_n)$ is a bounded sequence of positive real numbers. Take $a_n = 1/n$ and we have $\lim n^{1/n}=1 $

lele
  • 2,392
0

I want to add a proof that is based in the fact that $\sum \frac{a^k}{k!}=e^a$. In my opinion I found this fact easier to prove that $AM\ge GM$ inequality, thus from my point of view this is more basic. More over: we dont suppose or guess that the limit is $1$.

First suppose we proved that $\sqrt[n]{n}>\sqrt[n+1]{n+1}$ for $n\ge 2$, what is easy to do IMHO. From this proof we get very important information: the sequence $(\sqrt[n]{n})$ is decreasing and bounded below by $1$.

Then, by the monotone convergence theorem, exists some $L$ such that for all $\epsilon>0$ exists $N\in\Bbb N$ such that

$$|\sqrt[n]{n}-L|<\epsilon,\forall n\ge N$$

Suppose that $L>1$. From the square root of $2$ we know that $L<2$, in particular $L=1+a$ with $1>a>0$. Then it must be the case that $\sqrt[n]{n}-L>0$ because the sequence is bounded below by $L$. Then

$$\sqrt[n]{n}-1-a>0\iff \sqrt[n]{n}>1+a\iff n>(1+a)^n\iff 1>\frac1n (1+a)^n$$

for all $n\in\Bbb N$. Expanding the RHS we have that

$$\frac1n(1+a)^n=\frac1n\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n}{k}a^k=\sum_{k=0}^{n}\frac{(n-1)!}{(n-k)!}\cdot\frac{a^k}{k!}\ge\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\frac{a^k}{k!}$$

Then taking limits we have that

$$1\ge\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac1n(1+a)^n\ge\lim_{n\to\infty}\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\frac{a^k}{k!}=e^a>1$$

what is a contradiction. Thus $L=1$.$\Box$

Masacroso
  • 30,417
0

I posted a similar question and got a great answer that I don't want to be deleted with my question, so I'm posting that great answer here.

By

@Dr. Sundar

To show that $$ \lim\limits_{n \rightarrow \infty} \ a_n = 1 $$ where $$ a_n = n^{1 \over n} $$

Let $0 < \epsilon < 1 $ be given.

We note that $$ |n^{1 \over n} - 1 | < \epsilon \iff > - \epsilon < n^{1 \over n} - 1 < \epsilon \iff 1 - \epsilon < n^{1 \over n} < 1 + \epsilon $$ which is equivalent to $$ (1 - \epsilon)^n > < n < (1 + \epsilon)^n \tag{1} $$

Let $n \geq 1$ be any integer.

Clearly, $$ (1 - \epsilon)^n < 1 \leq n $$

This proves the left part of (1).

To prove the right part of (1), we note that $$ ( 1 + \epsilon )^n = > \sum\limits_{k = 0}^n \ \left( \matrix{n \cr > k \cr} \right) \ \epsilon^k > \left( \matrix{n \cr > 2 \cr} \right) \ \epsilon^2 > = {n (n - 1) \over 2} \ \epsilon^2 $$

We define $m = \lceil{ { 2 \over \epsilon^2} + 1 \rceil}$.

We choose $n > m$. Then we have $$ (1 + \epsilon)^n > {n (n - 1) \over > 2} \ \epsilon^2 > n $$

Thus, we have shown that for all $n > m$, (1) is true.

This completes the proof. $ \ \ \ \ \ \ \blacksquare$

0

You can estimate \begin{eqnarray} 1 & \leq & n^{\frac{1}{n}} = {e^{\ln(n)}}^{\frac{1}{e^{\ln(n)}}} = e^{2 \frac{1}{1!} \big(\frac{1}{2}\ln(n)\big)^1 e^{-\ln(n)}} \leq e^{2 \sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{1}{k!}\big(\frac{1}{2}\ln(n)\big)^k e^{-\ln(n)}} \\ & = & e^{2 e^{\frac{1}{2} \ln(n)}e^{-\ln(n)}} = e^{2e^{-\frac{1}{2}\ln(n)}} \rightarrow 1 \ , \end{eqnarray} as $n \rightarrow \infty$. Increasingness of $e^x$, continuity of $e^x$ and other basic properties of $e^x$ and $\ln(x)$ are assumed. Hence the limit in the question exists and equals to $1$.