Does the converse to Kronecker's lemma hold?

539 Views Asked by At

Odds are that this question has been answered already and even that the argument is not too complicated, but here it goes:

Assume that $(a_{k})_{k\in\mathbb{N}}$ is a sequence of real numbers and $(b_{k})_{k\in\mathbb{N}}$ is a sequence of positive numbers with $\lim_{n}b_{n}=\infty$.

Can we infer from the hypothesis $$\sum_{k}a_{k}$$ is not convergent that $$\limsup_{n}|\frac{1}{b_{n}}\sum_{k=1}^{n}a_{k}b_{k}|>0?$$ In other words, does the converse to Kronecker's lemma hold?

For the purpose of my question, you can assume that $(a_{n})_{n}$ is positive and decreasing and that $b_{n}=n$.

1

There are 1 best solutions below

1
On BEST ANSWER

Put $\displaystyle a_k=\frac{1}{k\log k}$ for $k\geq 2$, and say $a_1=10$;note that the series $a_k$ is divergent, and that $a_k$ is decreasing. Put $b_k=k$. We have $$\sum_{2}^n\frac{1}{\log k}\leq \frac{1}{\log 2}+\int_2^x\frac{dt}{\log t}$$ Integrating by parts $$\int_2^x\frac{dt}{\log t} =\frac{x}{\log x}-\frac{2}{\log 2}+\int_2^x \frac{dt}{(\log t)^2}$$

Now there exists $A$ such that for $t\geq A$, we have $\log t\geq 2$, and hence for $x\geq A$ $$\displaystyle \int_A^x\frac{dt}{(\log t)^2}\leq \frac{1}{2} \int_A^x\frac{dt}{\log t} $$ With some computations, this show that there exists a constant $c_1$ such that $$\int_2^x \frac{dt}{\log t}\leq 2\frac {x}{\log x}+c_1$$ Now we get with a constant $c_2$ $$\frac{1}{b_n}\sum_{k=1}^n b_ka_k\leq \frac{2}{\log n}+\frac{c_2}{n}$$ and $\displaystyle \frac{1}{b_n}\sum_{k=1}^n b_ka_k \to 0$.