How to prove the series $sumlimits_n=1^inftyfrac1nsin(ln n)$ diverges

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
7
down vote

favorite













How to prove the following series is divergent:
$$
sum_n=1^infty frac1n sin(ln n) ?
$$




What I was thinking is, since $sumlimits_n=1^infty frac1n$ diverges, $sin$ is periodical and $(ln (n+p)-ln n)$ converges to $0$ when $n$ goes to infinity for every $p$, maybe I can look for a sum of partial terms within some $(2kpi, 2kpi + pi)$ to be greater than a fixed $epsilon$. But when it comes to the detail, it troubles me. Any hint?







share|cite|improve this question






















  • Maybe this question helps?
    – Sil
    Aug 26 at 17:44










  • @Sil Thank you!
    – Edward Wang
    Aug 26 at 17:55










  • You could also use the argument that $sum_n=1^+inftyfracsin(ln(n))nsim int fracsin(ln(t))t,mathrmdt=-cos(ln(x))+C$. But since $-cos(ln(x))+C$ oscillates between $C-1$ and $C+1$, the series must be divergent.
    – Jam
    Aug 26 at 18:09










  • @Jam How do you justify the approximation by the integral?
    – Clement C.
    Aug 26 at 18:24










  • @ClementC. Truth be told, I'm still figuring that out. But I'm pretty sure there's a justification there somewhere
    – Jam
    Aug 26 at 18:35














up vote
7
down vote

favorite













How to prove the following series is divergent:
$$
sum_n=1^infty frac1n sin(ln n) ?
$$




What I was thinking is, since $sumlimits_n=1^infty frac1n$ diverges, $sin$ is periodical and $(ln (n+p)-ln n)$ converges to $0$ when $n$ goes to infinity for every $p$, maybe I can look for a sum of partial terms within some $(2kpi, 2kpi + pi)$ to be greater than a fixed $epsilon$. But when it comes to the detail, it troubles me. Any hint?







share|cite|improve this question






















  • Maybe this question helps?
    – Sil
    Aug 26 at 17:44










  • @Sil Thank you!
    – Edward Wang
    Aug 26 at 17:55










  • You could also use the argument that $sum_n=1^+inftyfracsin(ln(n))nsim int fracsin(ln(t))t,mathrmdt=-cos(ln(x))+C$. But since $-cos(ln(x))+C$ oscillates between $C-1$ and $C+1$, the series must be divergent.
    – Jam
    Aug 26 at 18:09










  • @Jam How do you justify the approximation by the integral?
    – Clement C.
    Aug 26 at 18:24










  • @ClementC. Truth be told, I'm still figuring that out. But I'm pretty sure there's a justification there somewhere
    – Jam
    Aug 26 at 18:35












up vote
7
down vote

favorite









up vote
7
down vote

favorite












How to prove the following series is divergent:
$$
sum_n=1^infty frac1n sin(ln n) ?
$$




What I was thinking is, since $sumlimits_n=1^infty frac1n$ diverges, $sin$ is periodical and $(ln (n+p)-ln n)$ converges to $0$ when $n$ goes to infinity for every $p$, maybe I can look for a sum of partial terms within some $(2kpi, 2kpi + pi)$ to be greater than a fixed $epsilon$. But when it comes to the detail, it troubles me. Any hint?







share|cite|improve this question















How to prove the following series is divergent:
$$
sum_n=1^infty frac1n sin(ln n) ?
$$




What I was thinking is, since $sumlimits_n=1^infty frac1n$ diverges, $sin$ is periodical and $(ln (n+p)-ln n)$ converges to $0$ when $n$ goes to infinity for every $p$, maybe I can look for a sum of partial terms within some $(2kpi, 2kpi + pi)$ to be greater than a fixed $epsilon$. But when it comes to the detail, it troubles me. Any hint?









share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Aug 26 at 19:14









Did

243k23208443




243k23208443










asked Aug 26 at 17:37









Edward Wang

661411




661411











  • Maybe this question helps?
    – Sil
    Aug 26 at 17:44










  • @Sil Thank you!
    – Edward Wang
    Aug 26 at 17:55










  • You could also use the argument that $sum_n=1^+inftyfracsin(ln(n))nsim int fracsin(ln(t))t,mathrmdt=-cos(ln(x))+C$. But since $-cos(ln(x))+C$ oscillates between $C-1$ and $C+1$, the series must be divergent.
    – Jam
    Aug 26 at 18:09










  • @Jam How do you justify the approximation by the integral?
    – Clement C.
    Aug 26 at 18:24










  • @ClementC. Truth be told, I'm still figuring that out. But I'm pretty sure there's a justification there somewhere
    – Jam
    Aug 26 at 18:35
















  • Maybe this question helps?
    – Sil
    Aug 26 at 17:44










  • @Sil Thank you!
    – Edward Wang
    Aug 26 at 17:55










  • You could also use the argument that $sum_n=1^+inftyfracsin(ln(n))nsim int fracsin(ln(t))t,mathrmdt=-cos(ln(x))+C$. But since $-cos(ln(x))+C$ oscillates between $C-1$ and $C+1$, the series must be divergent.
    – Jam
    Aug 26 at 18:09










  • @Jam How do you justify the approximation by the integral?
    – Clement C.
    Aug 26 at 18:24










  • @ClementC. Truth be told, I'm still figuring that out. But I'm pretty sure there's a justification there somewhere
    – Jam
    Aug 26 at 18:35















Maybe this question helps?
– Sil
Aug 26 at 17:44




Maybe this question helps?
– Sil
Aug 26 at 17:44












@Sil Thank you!
– Edward Wang
Aug 26 at 17:55




@Sil Thank you!
– Edward Wang
Aug 26 at 17:55












You could also use the argument that $sum_n=1^+inftyfracsin(ln(n))nsim int fracsin(ln(t))t,mathrmdt=-cos(ln(x))+C$. But since $-cos(ln(x))+C$ oscillates between $C-1$ and $C+1$, the series must be divergent.
– Jam
Aug 26 at 18:09




You could also use the argument that $sum_n=1^+inftyfracsin(ln(n))nsim int fracsin(ln(t))t,mathrmdt=-cos(ln(x))+C$. But since $-cos(ln(x))+C$ oscillates between $C-1$ and $C+1$, the series must be divergent.
– Jam
Aug 26 at 18:09












@Jam How do you justify the approximation by the integral?
– Clement C.
Aug 26 at 18:24




@Jam How do you justify the approximation by the integral?
– Clement C.
Aug 26 at 18:24












@ClementC. Truth be told, I'm still figuring that out. But I'm pretty sure there's a justification there somewhere
– Jam
Aug 26 at 18:35




@ClementC. Truth be told, I'm still figuring that out. But I'm pretty sure there's a justification there somewhere
– Jam
Aug 26 at 18:35










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
4
down vote



accepted










Since it seems that everyone feels compelled to rush to the comparison with an integral, let us present a simpler, low-tech, proof (which, additionally, is the OP's idea).



Start with the elementary fact that $$sin(log n)geqslantfrac12$$ for every $n$ such that $a_kleqslant nleqslant b_k$ for some $k$, with $$a_k=lceil e^2kpi+pi/6rceilqquad b_k=lfloor e^2kpi+5pi/6rfloor$$
Thus, the slice of the series from $a_k$ to $b_k$ can be lower bounded as follows: $$sum_n=a_k^b_kfrac1nsin(log n)geqslantfrac12sum_n=a_k^b_kfrac1ngeqslantfrac12(b_k-a_k+1)frac1b_k$$ Since $a_ktoinfty$ and the RHS above converges to $$frac12(1-e^-2pi/3)ne0$$ the series of interest diverges.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • Yippee... Yet another silent downvote.
    – Did
    Aug 26 at 20:08










  • I gave you a +1 to compensate for it. I rarely down-vote, but when I do, I explain it.
    – DanielWainfleet
    Aug 26 at 20:29







  • 1




    I don't understand. It seems the proof consists in saying that you can find a sub-series which diverges, and therefore the whole series diverges. But this series has negative terms.
    – Jack M
    Aug 26 at 20:31










  • @JackM This is showing that the sequence of partial sums is not Cauchy (and hence diverges).
    – Clement C.
    Aug 26 at 20:42










  • @JackM If a series $sum x_n$ converges then the rests converge to zero in the sense that, for every $epsilon>0$ there exists some $N$ such that, for every $ngeqslant mgeqslant N$, $$left|sum_k=m^nx_kright|<epsilon$$
    – Did
    Aug 26 at 21:15


















up vote
4
down vote













As proved here, you can always apply the integral test to $sum_n geqslant 1 f(n)$ even if $f$ is not monotone as long as



$$tag*int_1^infty|f'(x)| , dx < +infty$$



In this case, $f'(x) = -sin (ln x)/x^2 + cos(ln x)/x^2$. Since $|f'(x)| leqslant 2/x^2$, the condition (*) is met.



It then follows that the series diverges along with the integral $int_1^infty f(x) , dx$.






share|cite|improve this answer




















  • "Using some technology" as Prof. William Weiss once said in another context.................+1
    – DanielWainfleet
    Aug 26 at 20:27


















up vote
1
down vote













Let
$$a_n = fracsin ln nn$$
For $n > 0$, let's take



$$b_n = a_n - int_n^n+1fracsinln xx dx
= int_0^1 left(a_n - fracsin ln(n+t)n+tright) dt
$$
Since for each $alpha in ]0,1]$, we can apply MVT to find a $c in [0,alpha]$



$$left|a_n - fracsinln(n+t)n+tright|
= left|fracsinln(n+c) + sinln(n+c)(n+c)^2right|alpha le fracsqrt2tn^2$$
As a consequence,
$$|b_n| le fracsqrt2n^2int_0^1 alpha dalpha = frac1sqrt2n^2$$
By the $p-$test, $sum frac1sqrt2n^2$ is a convergent series.
So by the comparison test, $sum b_n$ is an absolutely converging series.
Let $A = sum b_n < infty$



$$A= lim_Ntoinftyleft[sum_n=1^N a_n - sinln(N+1)right]
$$
Since the limit of $ sinln(N+1)$ oscillates, then the limit of $sum_n=1^N a_n$ has to oscillate to maintain a finite $A$. Hence $sum_n=1^infty a_n$ diverges.



NOTE: Answer was inspired by @achille hui






share|cite|improve this answer





























    up vote
    1
    down vote













    For $nin Bbb N$ let $log x_n=pi(2n+frac 12).$ Let $y_n$ be the least integer greater than or equal to $x_n.$



    For brevity let $d_n=log y_n-log x_n.$



    For $0leq jleq y_n-1$ we have $$pi (2n+frac 12)=log x_nleq log y_nleq$$ $$leq log (j+y_n)<log y_n+log 2=$$ $$=d_n+log x_n+log 2=$$ $$=pi (2n+frac 12)+d_n+log 2.$$



    We also have $$0leq d_n=log (1+frac y_n-x_nx_n)<$$ $$<log (1+frac 1x_n)<frac 1x_nleq frac 1x_1=e^-5pi/2.$$



    So for $0leq j<y_n-1$ we have $$sin log (j+y_n)=cos (-E_n,j)$$ where $0leq E_n,j<d_n+log 2 leq e^-5pi/2+log 2<pi /4. $



    (Note: $ E_n,j $ is an ad hoc abbreviation based on the preceding paragraphs.)



    So for $0leq j<2y_j-1$ we have $sin log (j+y_n)>cos (pi/4)>1/2.$



    Now $y_nto infty$ as $nto infty$ and we have $$sum_v=y_n^2y_n-1frac sin log vv=sum_j=0^y_n-1frac sin log (j+y_n)j+y_n>sum_j=0^y_n-1frac 1/22y_n=frac 14.$$



    So the Cauchy Criterion is not met.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • I meant to give a hint but the details of the hint seemed to be difficult to say. As I re-wrote it, it became simpler and simpler, but it also turned into a complete solution
      – DanielWainfleet
      Aug 26 at 20:20











    • "it also turned into a complete solution" ...which happens to be completely similar (to stay polite) to another answer posted 1 hour earlier.
      – Did
      Aug 26 at 21:17






    • 1




      Which I didn't read in detail. Of course it's similar.
      – DanielWainfleet
      Aug 26 at 21:36










    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: false,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    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%2f2895288%2fhow-to-prove-the-series-sum-limits-n-1-infty-frac1n-sin-ln-n-diverges%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest






























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    4
    down vote



    accepted










    Since it seems that everyone feels compelled to rush to the comparison with an integral, let us present a simpler, low-tech, proof (which, additionally, is the OP's idea).



    Start with the elementary fact that $$sin(log n)geqslantfrac12$$ for every $n$ such that $a_kleqslant nleqslant b_k$ for some $k$, with $$a_k=lceil e^2kpi+pi/6rceilqquad b_k=lfloor e^2kpi+5pi/6rfloor$$
    Thus, the slice of the series from $a_k$ to $b_k$ can be lower bounded as follows: $$sum_n=a_k^b_kfrac1nsin(log n)geqslantfrac12sum_n=a_k^b_kfrac1ngeqslantfrac12(b_k-a_k+1)frac1b_k$$ Since $a_ktoinfty$ and the RHS above converges to $$frac12(1-e^-2pi/3)ne0$$ the series of interest diverges.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • Yippee... Yet another silent downvote.
      – Did
      Aug 26 at 20:08










    • I gave you a +1 to compensate for it. I rarely down-vote, but when I do, I explain it.
      – DanielWainfleet
      Aug 26 at 20:29







    • 1




      I don't understand. It seems the proof consists in saying that you can find a sub-series which diverges, and therefore the whole series diverges. But this series has negative terms.
      – Jack M
      Aug 26 at 20:31










    • @JackM This is showing that the sequence of partial sums is not Cauchy (and hence diverges).
      – Clement C.
      Aug 26 at 20:42










    • @JackM If a series $sum x_n$ converges then the rests converge to zero in the sense that, for every $epsilon>0$ there exists some $N$ such that, for every $ngeqslant mgeqslant N$, $$left|sum_k=m^nx_kright|<epsilon$$
      – Did
      Aug 26 at 21:15















    up vote
    4
    down vote



    accepted










    Since it seems that everyone feels compelled to rush to the comparison with an integral, let us present a simpler, low-tech, proof (which, additionally, is the OP's idea).



    Start with the elementary fact that $$sin(log n)geqslantfrac12$$ for every $n$ such that $a_kleqslant nleqslant b_k$ for some $k$, with $$a_k=lceil e^2kpi+pi/6rceilqquad b_k=lfloor e^2kpi+5pi/6rfloor$$
    Thus, the slice of the series from $a_k$ to $b_k$ can be lower bounded as follows: $$sum_n=a_k^b_kfrac1nsin(log n)geqslantfrac12sum_n=a_k^b_kfrac1ngeqslantfrac12(b_k-a_k+1)frac1b_k$$ Since $a_ktoinfty$ and the RHS above converges to $$frac12(1-e^-2pi/3)ne0$$ the series of interest diverges.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • Yippee... Yet another silent downvote.
      – Did
      Aug 26 at 20:08










    • I gave you a +1 to compensate for it. I rarely down-vote, but when I do, I explain it.
      – DanielWainfleet
      Aug 26 at 20:29







    • 1




      I don't understand. It seems the proof consists in saying that you can find a sub-series which diverges, and therefore the whole series diverges. But this series has negative terms.
      – Jack M
      Aug 26 at 20:31










    • @JackM This is showing that the sequence of partial sums is not Cauchy (and hence diverges).
      – Clement C.
      Aug 26 at 20:42










    • @JackM If a series $sum x_n$ converges then the rests converge to zero in the sense that, for every $epsilon>0$ there exists some $N$ such that, for every $ngeqslant mgeqslant N$, $$left|sum_k=m^nx_kright|<epsilon$$
      – Did
      Aug 26 at 21:15













    up vote
    4
    down vote



    accepted







    up vote
    4
    down vote



    accepted






    Since it seems that everyone feels compelled to rush to the comparison with an integral, let us present a simpler, low-tech, proof (which, additionally, is the OP's idea).



    Start with the elementary fact that $$sin(log n)geqslantfrac12$$ for every $n$ such that $a_kleqslant nleqslant b_k$ for some $k$, with $$a_k=lceil e^2kpi+pi/6rceilqquad b_k=lfloor e^2kpi+5pi/6rfloor$$
    Thus, the slice of the series from $a_k$ to $b_k$ can be lower bounded as follows: $$sum_n=a_k^b_kfrac1nsin(log n)geqslantfrac12sum_n=a_k^b_kfrac1ngeqslantfrac12(b_k-a_k+1)frac1b_k$$ Since $a_ktoinfty$ and the RHS above converges to $$frac12(1-e^-2pi/3)ne0$$ the series of interest diverges.






    share|cite|improve this answer














    Since it seems that everyone feels compelled to rush to the comparison with an integral, let us present a simpler, low-tech, proof (which, additionally, is the OP's idea).



    Start with the elementary fact that $$sin(log n)geqslantfrac12$$ for every $n$ such that $a_kleqslant nleqslant b_k$ for some $k$, with $$a_k=lceil e^2kpi+pi/6rceilqquad b_k=lfloor e^2kpi+5pi/6rfloor$$
    Thus, the slice of the series from $a_k$ to $b_k$ can be lower bounded as follows: $$sum_n=a_k^b_kfrac1nsin(log n)geqslantfrac12sum_n=a_k^b_kfrac1ngeqslantfrac12(b_k-a_k+1)frac1b_k$$ Since $a_ktoinfty$ and the RHS above converges to $$frac12(1-e^-2pi/3)ne0$$ the series of interest diverges.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Aug 26 at 19:14

























    answered Aug 26 at 19:07









    Did

    243k23208443




    243k23208443











    • Yippee... Yet another silent downvote.
      – Did
      Aug 26 at 20:08










    • I gave you a +1 to compensate for it. I rarely down-vote, but when I do, I explain it.
      – DanielWainfleet
      Aug 26 at 20:29







    • 1




      I don't understand. It seems the proof consists in saying that you can find a sub-series which diverges, and therefore the whole series diverges. But this series has negative terms.
      – Jack M
      Aug 26 at 20:31










    • @JackM This is showing that the sequence of partial sums is not Cauchy (and hence diverges).
      – Clement C.
      Aug 26 at 20:42










    • @JackM If a series $sum x_n$ converges then the rests converge to zero in the sense that, for every $epsilon>0$ there exists some $N$ such that, for every $ngeqslant mgeqslant N$, $$left|sum_k=m^nx_kright|<epsilon$$
      – Did
      Aug 26 at 21:15

















    • Yippee... Yet another silent downvote.
      – Did
      Aug 26 at 20:08










    • I gave you a +1 to compensate for it. I rarely down-vote, but when I do, I explain it.
      – DanielWainfleet
      Aug 26 at 20:29







    • 1




      I don't understand. It seems the proof consists in saying that you can find a sub-series which diverges, and therefore the whole series diverges. But this series has negative terms.
      – Jack M
      Aug 26 at 20:31










    • @JackM This is showing that the sequence of partial sums is not Cauchy (and hence diverges).
      – Clement C.
      Aug 26 at 20:42










    • @JackM If a series $sum x_n$ converges then the rests converge to zero in the sense that, for every $epsilon>0$ there exists some $N$ such that, for every $ngeqslant mgeqslant N$, $$left|sum_k=m^nx_kright|<epsilon$$
      – Did
      Aug 26 at 21:15
















    Yippee... Yet another silent downvote.
    – Did
    Aug 26 at 20:08




    Yippee... Yet another silent downvote.
    – Did
    Aug 26 at 20:08












    I gave you a +1 to compensate for it. I rarely down-vote, but when I do, I explain it.
    – DanielWainfleet
    Aug 26 at 20:29





    I gave you a +1 to compensate for it. I rarely down-vote, but when I do, I explain it.
    – DanielWainfleet
    Aug 26 at 20:29





    1




    1




    I don't understand. It seems the proof consists in saying that you can find a sub-series which diverges, and therefore the whole series diverges. But this series has negative terms.
    – Jack M
    Aug 26 at 20:31




    I don't understand. It seems the proof consists in saying that you can find a sub-series which diverges, and therefore the whole series diverges. But this series has negative terms.
    – Jack M
    Aug 26 at 20:31












    @JackM This is showing that the sequence of partial sums is not Cauchy (and hence diverges).
    – Clement C.
    Aug 26 at 20:42




    @JackM This is showing that the sequence of partial sums is not Cauchy (and hence diverges).
    – Clement C.
    Aug 26 at 20:42












    @JackM If a series $sum x_n$ converges then the rests converge to zero in the sense that, for every $epsilon>0$ there exists some $N$ such that, for every $ngeqslant mgeqslant N$, $$left|sum_k=m^nx_kright|<epsilon$$
    – Did
    Aug 26 at 21:15





    @JackM If a series $sum x_n$ converges then the rests converge to zero in the sense that, for every $epsilon>0$ there exists some $N$ such that, for every $ngeqslant mgeqslant N$, $$left|sum_k=m^nx_kright|<epsilon$$
    – Did
    Aug 26 at 21:15











    up vote
    4
    down vote













    As proved here, you can always apply the integral test to $sum_n geqslant 1 f(n)$ even if $f$ is not monotone as long as



    $$tag*int_1^infty|f'(x)| , dx < +infty$$



    In this case, $f'(x) = -sin (ln x)/x^2 + cos(ln x)/x^2$. Since $|f'(x)| leqslant 2/x^2$, the condition (*) is met.



    It then follows that the series diverges along with the integral $int_1^infty f(x) , dx$.






    share|cite|improve this answer




















    • "Using some technology" as Prof. William Weiss once said in another context.................+1
      – DanielWainfleet
      Aug 26 at 20:27















    up vote
    4
    down vote













    As proved here, you can always apply the integral test to $sum_n geqslant 1 f(n)$ even if $f$ is not monotone as long as



    $$tag*int_1^infty|f'(x)| , dx < +infty$$



    In this case, $f'(x) = -sin (ln x)/x^2 + cos(ln x)/x^2$. Since $|f'(x)| leqslant 2/x^2$, the condition (*) is met.



    It then follows that the series diverges along with the integral $int_1^infty f(x) , dx$.






    share|cite|improve this answer




















    • "Using some technology" as Prof. William Weiss once said in another context.................+1
      – DanielWainfleet
      Aug 26 at 20:27













    up vote
    4
    down vote










    up vote
    4
    down vote









    As proved here, you can always apply the integral test to $sum_n geqslant 1 f(n)$ even if $f$ is not monotone as long as



    $$tag*int_1^infty|f'(x)| , dx < +infty$$



    In this case, $f'(x) = -sin (ln x)/x^2 + cos(ln x)/x^2$. Since $|f'(x)| leqslant 2/x^2$, the condition (*) is met.



    It then follows that the series diverges along with the integral $int_1^infty f(x) , dx$.






    share|cite|improve this answer












    As proved here, you can always apply the integral test to $sum_n geqslant 1 f(n)$ even if $f$ is not monotone as long as



    $$tag*int_1^infty|f'(x)| , dx < +infty$$



    In this case, $f'(x) = -sin (ln x)/x^2 + cos(ln x)/x^2$. Since $|f'(x)| leqslant 2/x^2$, the condition (*) is met.



    It then follows that the series diverges along with the integral $int_1^infty f(x) , dx$.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered Aug 26 at 18:58









    RRL

    44.2k42362




    44.2k42362











    • "Using some technology" as Prof. William Weiss once said in another context.................+1
      – DanielWainfleet
      Aug 26 at 20:27

















    • "Using some technology" as Prof. William Weiss once said in another context.................+1
      – DanielWainfleet
      Aug 26 at 20:27
















    "Using some technology" as Prof. William Weiss once said in another context.................+1
    – DanielWainfleet
    Aug 26 at 20:27





    "Using some technology" as Prof. William Weiss once said in another context.................+1
    – DanielWainfleet
    Aug 26 at 20:27











    up vote
    1
    down vote













    Let
    $$a_n = fracsin ln nn$$
    For $n > 0$, let's take



    $$b_n = a_n - int_n^n+1fracsinln xx dx
    = int_0^1 left(a_n - fracsin ln(n+t)n+tright) dt
    $$
    Since for each $alpha in ]0,1]$, we can apply MVT to find a $c in [0,alpha]$



    $$left|a_n - fracsinln(n+t)n+tright|
    = left|fracsinln(n+c) + sinln(n+c)(n+c)^2right|alpha le fracsqrt2tn^2$$
    As a consequence,
    $$|b_n| le fracsqrt2n^2int_0^1 alpha dalpha = frac1sqrt2n^2$$
    By the $p-$test, $sum frac1sqrt2n^2$ is a convergent series.
    So by the comparison test, $sum b_n$ is an absolutely converging series.
    Let $A = sum b_n < infty$



    $$A= lim_Ntoinftyleft[sum_n=1^N a_n - sinln(N+1)right]
    $$
    Since the limit of $ sinln(N+1)$ oscillates, then the limit of $sum_n=1^N a_n$ has to oscillate to maintain a finite $A$. Hence $sum_n=1^infty a_n$ diverges.



    NOTE: Answer was inspired by @achille hui






    share|cite|improve this answer


























      up vote
      1
      down vote













      Let
      $$a_n = fracsin ln nn$$
      For $n > 0$, let's take



      $$b_n = a_n - int_n^n+1fracsinln xx dx
      = int_0^1 left(a_n - fracsin ln(n+t)n+tright) dt
      $$
      Since for each $alpha in ]0,1]$, we can apply MVT to find a $c in [0,alpha]$



      $$left|a_n - fracsinln(n+t)n+tright|
      = left|fracsinln(n+c) + sinln(n+c)(n+c)^2right|alpha le fracsqrt2tn^2$$
      As a consequence,
      $$|b_n| le fracsqrt2n^2int_0^1 alpha dalpha = frac1sqrt2n^2$$
      By the $p-$test, $sum frac1sqrt2n^2$ is a convergent series.
      So by the comparison test, $sum b_n$ is an absolutely converging series.
      Let $A = sum b_n < infty$



      $$A= lim_Ntoinftyleft[sum_n=1^N a_n - sinln(N+1)right]
      $$
      Since the limit of $ sinln(N+1)$ oscillates, then the limit of $sum_n=1^N a_n$ has to oscillate to maintain a finite $A$. Hence $sum_n=1^infty a_n$ diverges.



      NOTE: Answer was inspired by @achille hui






      share|cite|improve this answer
























        up vote
        1
        down vote










        up vote
        1
        down vote









        Let
        $$a_n = fracsin ln nn$$
        For $n > 0$, let's take



        $$b_n = a_n - int_n^n+1fracsinln xx dx
        = int_0^1 left(a_n - fracsin ln(n+t)n+tright) dt
        $$
        Since for each $alpha in ]0,1]$, we can apply MVT to find a $c in [0,alpha]$



        $$left|a_n - fracsinln(n+t)n+tright|
        = left|fracsinln(n+c) + sinln(n+c)(n+c)^2right|alpha le fracsqrt2tn^2$$
        As a consequence,
        $$|b_n| le fracsqrt2n^2int_0^1 alpha dalpha = frac1sqrt2n^2$$
        By the $p-$test, $sum frac1sqrt2n^2$ is a convergent series.
        So by the comparison test, $sum b_n$ is an absolutely converging series.
        Let $A = sum b_n < infty$



        $$A= lim_Ntoinftyleft[sum_n=1^N a_n - sinln(N+1)right]
        $$
        Since the limit of $ sinln(N+1)$ oscillates, then the limit of $sum_n=1^N a_n$ has to oscillate to maintain a finite $A$. Hence $sum_n=1^infty a_n$ diverges.



        NOTE: Answer was inspired by @achille hui






        share|cite|improve this answer














        Let
        $$a_n = fracsin ln nn$$
        For $n > 0$, let's take



        $$b_n = a_n - int_n^n+1fracsinln xx dx
        = int_0^1 left(a_n - fracsin ln(n+t)n+tright) dt
        $$
        Since for each $alpha in ]0,1]$, we can apply MVT to find a $c in [0,alpha]$



        $$left|a_n - fracsinln(n+t)n+tright|
        = left|fracsinln(n+c) + sinln(n+c)(n+c)^2right|alpha le fracsqrt2tn^2$$
        As a consequence,
        $$|b_n| le fracsqrt2n^2int_0^1 alpha dalpha = frac1sqrt2n^2$$
        By the $p-$test, $sum frac1sqrt2n^2$ is a convergent series.
        So by the comparison test, $sum b_n$ is an absolutely converging series.
        Let $A = sum b_n < infty$



        $$A= lim_Ntoinftyleft[sum_n=1^N a_n - sinln(N+1)right]
        $$
        Since the limit of $ sinln(N+1)$ oscillates, then the limit of $sum_n=1^N a_n$ has to oscillate to maintain a finite $A$. Hence $sum_n=1^infty a_n$ diverges.



        NOTE: Answer was inspired by @achille hui







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Aug 26 at 18:26

























        answered Aug 26 at 18:20









        Ahmad Bazzi

        4,1881521




        4,1881521




















            up vote
            1
            down vote













            For $nin Bbb N$ let $log x_n=pi(2n+frac 12).$ Let $y_n$ be the least integer greater than or equal to $x_n.$



            For brevity let $d_n=log y_n-log x_n.$



            For $0leq jleq y_n-1$ we have $$pi (2n+frac 12)=log x_nleq log y_nleq$$ $$leq log (j+y_n)<log y_n+log 2=$$ $$=d_n+log x_n+log 2=$$ $$=pi (2n+frac 12)+d_n+log 2.$$



            We also have $$0leq d_n=log (1+frac y_n-x_nx_n)<$$ $$<log (1+frac 1x_n)<frac 1x_nleq frac 1x_1=e^-5pi/2.$$



            So for $0leq j<y_n-1$ we have $$sin log (j+y_n)=cos (-E_n,j)$$ where $0leq E_n,j<d_n+log 2 leq e^-5pi/2+log 2<pi /4. $



            (Note: $ E_n,j $ is an ad hoc abbreviation based on the preceding paragraphs.)



            So for $0leq j<2y_j-1$ we have $sin log (j+y_n)>cos (pi/4)>1/2.$



            Now $y_nto infty$ as $nto infty$ and we have $$sum_v=y_n^2y_n-1frac sin log vv=sum_j=0^y_n-1frac sin log (j+y_n)j+y_n>sum_j=0^y_n-1frac 1/22y_n=frac 14.$$



            So the Cauchy Criterion is not met.






            share|cite|improve this answer






















            • I meant to give a hint but the details of the hint seemed to be difficult to say. As I re-wrote it, it became simpler and simpler, but it also turned into a complete solution
              – DanielWainfleet
              Aug 26 at 20:20











            • "it also turned into a complete solution" ...which happens to be completely similar (to stay polite) to another answer posted 1 hour earlier.
              – Did
              Aug 26 at 21:17






            • 1




              Which I didn't read in detail. Of course it's similar.
              – DanielWainfleet
              Aug 26 at 21:36














            up vote
            1
            down vote













            For $nin Bbb N$ let $log x_n=pi(2n+frac 12).$ Let $y_n$ be the least integer greater than or equal to $x_n.$



            For brevity let $d_n=log y_n-log x_n.$



            For $0leq jleq y_n-1$ we have $$pi (2n+frac 12)=log x_nleq log y_nleq$$ $$leq log (j+y_n)<log y_n+log 2=$$ $$=d_n+log x_n+log 2=$$ $$=pi (2n+frac 12)+d_n+log 2.$$



            We also have $$0leq d_n=log (1+frac y_n-x_nx_n)<$$ $$<log (1+frac 1x_n)<frac 1x_nleq frac 1x_1=e^-5pi/2.$$



            So for $0leq j<y_n-1$ we have $$sin log (j+y_n)=cos (-E_n,j)$$ where $0leq E_n,j<d_n+log 2 leq e^-5pi/2+log 2<pi /4. $



            (Note: $ E_n,j $ is an ad hoc abbreviation based on the preceding paragraphs.)



            So for $0leq j<2y_j-1$ we have $sin log (j+y_n)>cos (pi/4)>1/2.$



            Now $y_nto infty$ as $nto infty$ and we have $$sum_v=y_n^2y_n-1frac sin log vv=sum_j=0^y_n-1frac sin log (j+y_n)j+y_n>sum_j=0^y_n-1frac 1/22y_n=frac 14.$$



            So the Cauchy Criterion is not met.






            share|cite|improve this answer






















            • I meant to give a hint but the details of the hint seemed to be difficult to say. As I re-wrote it, it became simpler and simpler, but it also turned into a complete solution
              – DanielWainfleet
              Aug 26 at 20:20











            • "it also turned into a complete solution" ...which happens to be completely similar (to stay polite) to another answer posted 1 hour earlier.
              – Did
              Aug 26 at 21:17






            • 1




              Which I didn't read in detail. Of course it's similar.
              – DanielWainfleet
              Aug 26 at 21:36












            up vote
            1
            down vote










            up vote
            1
            down vote









            For $nin Bbb N$ let $log x_n=pi(2n+frac 12).$ Let $y_n$ be the least integer greater than or equal to $x_n.$



            For brevity let $d_n=log y_n-log x_n.$



            For $0leq jleq y_n-1$ we have $$pi (2n+frac 12)=log x_nleq log y_nleq$$ $$leq log (j+y_n)<log y_n+log 2=$$ $$=d_n+log x_n+log 2=$$ $$=pi (2n+frac 12)+d_n+log 2.$$



            We also have $$0leq d_n=log (1+frac y_n-x_nx_n)<$$ $$<log (1+frac 1x_n)<frac 1x_nleq frac 1x_1=e^-5pi/2.$$



            So for $0leq j<y_n-1$ we have $$sin log (j+y_n)=cos (-E_n,j)$$ where $0leq E_n,j<d_n+log 2 leq e^-5pi/2+log 2<pi /4. $



            (Note: $ E_n,j $ is an ad hoc abbreviation based on the preceding paragraphs.)



            So for $0leq j<2y_j-1$ we have $sin log (j+y_n)>cos (pi/4)>1/2.$



            Now $y_nto infty$ as $nto infty$ and we have $$sum_v=y_n^2y_n-1frac sin log vv=sum_j=0^y_n-1frac sin log (j+y_n)j+y_n>sum_j=0^y_n-1frac 1/22y_n=frac 14.$$



            So the Cauchy Criterion is not met.






            share|cite|improve this answer














            For $nin Bbb N$ let $log x_n=pi(2n+frac 12).$ Let $y_n$ be the least integer greater than or equal to $x_n.$



            For brevity let $d_n=log y_n-log x_n.$



            For $0leq jleq y_n-1$ we have $$pi (2n+frac 12)=log x_nleq log y_nleq$$ $$leq log (j+y_n)<log y_n+log 2=$$ $$=d_n+log x_n+log 2=$$ $$=pi (2n+frac 12)+d_n+log 2.$$



            We also have $$0leq d_n=log (1+frac y_n-x_nx_n)<$$ $$<log (1+frac 1x_n)<frac 1x_nleq frac 1x_1=e^-5pi/2.$$



            So for $0leq j<y_n-1$ we have $$sin log (j+y_n)=cos (-E_n,j)$$ where $0leq E_n,j<d_n+log 2 leq e^-5pi/2+log 2<pi /4. $



            (Note: $ E_n,j $ is an ad hoc abbreviation based on the preceding paragraphs.)



            So for $0leq j<2y_j-1$ we have $sin log (j+y_n)>cos (pi/4)>1/2.$



            Now $y_nto infty$ as $nto infty$ and we have $$sum_v=y_n^2y_n-1frac sin log vv=sum_j=0^y_n-1frac sin log (j+y_n)j+y_n>sum_j=0^y_n-1frac 1/22y_n=frac 14.$$



            So the Cauchy Criterion is not met.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Aug 26 at 20:16

























            answered Aug 26 at 20:09









            DanielWainfleet

            32.1k31644




            32.1k31644











            • I meant to give a hint but the details of the hint seemed to be difficult to say. As I re-wrote it, it became simpler and simpler, but it also turned into a complete solution
              – DanielWainfleet
              Aug 26 at 20:20











            • "it also turned into a complete solution" ...which happens to be completely similar (to stay polite) to another answer posted 1 hour earlier.
              – Did
              Aug 26 at 21:17






            • 1




              Which I didn't read in detail. Of course it's similar.
              – DanielWainfleet
              Aug 26 at 21:36
















            • I meant to give a hint but the details of the hint seemed to be difficult to say. As I re-wrote it, it became simpler and simpler, but it also turned into a complete solution
              – DanielWainfleet
              Aug 26 at 20:20











            • "it also turned into a complete solution" ...which happens to be completely similar (to stay polite) to another answer posted 1 hour earlier.
              – Did
              Aug 26 at 21:17






            • 1




              Which I didn't read in detail. Of course it's similar.
              – DanielWainfleet
              Aug 26 at 21:36















            I meant to give a hint but the details of the hint seemed to be difficult to say. As I re-wrote it, it became simpler and simpler, but it also turned into a complete solution
            – DanielWainfleet
            Aug 26 at 20:20





            I meant to give a hint but the details of the hint seemed to be difficult to say. As I re-wrote it, it became simpler and simpler, but it also turned into a complete solution
            – DanielWainfleet
            Aug 26 at 20:20













            "it also turned into a complete solution" ...which happens to be completely similar (to stay polite) to another answer posted 1 hour earlier.
            – Did
            Aug 26 at 21:17




            "it also turned into a complete solution" ...which happens to be completely similar (to stay polite) to another answer posted 1 hour earlier.
            – Did
            Aug 26 at 21:17




            1




            1




            Which I didn't read in detail. Of course it's similar.
            – DanielWainfleet
            Aug 26 at 21:36




            Which I didn't read in detail. Of course it's similar.
            – DanielWainfleet
            Aug 26 at 21:36

















             

            draft saved


            draft discarded















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2895288%2fhow-to-prove-the-series-sum-limits-n-1-infty-frac1n-sin-ln-n-diverges%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest













































































            這個網誌中的熱門文章

            tkz-euclide: tkzDrawCircle[R] not working

            How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

            1st Magritte Awards