Subsequence Convergence Theorem

subsequence

Let (an) be a sequence. Suppose that:

n1,n2,n3,⋯∈N

satisfying:

1≤n1<n2<n3<…

Then the sequence (ank) for all k∈N is a subsequence of (an). It's a proper subsequence if (ank) doesn't have all k=nk, namely ∃k where k≠nk.

The idea is that we just remove possibly some terms, and then preserve the order.

∀k∈N,nk≥k.

Example

Consider the sequence:

(1n)=(1,12,13,14,…)

Some sub sequences of these include:

(1,13,15,17,…)(1,14,19,116,…)(12,13,14,15,…)

an invalid sub sequence would be:

(1,13,12,14,…)

since the order of terms in the sequence must be preserved.

Notice that each of these sub sequences converges to the same value (namely 0 in this case) to the original sequence. This is what the next theorem tries to show.

The Theorem

Subsequence Convergence Theorem

A subsequence of a convergent sequence converges to the same value as the original sequence.

Proof
Note our observation that ∀k∈N,nk≥k. Say (an) converges to some L. Then ∀ε>0∃N∈N where for all n≥N then:

|an−L|<ε

Let (ank) be a subsequence. Let ε>0. Then ∃N∈N where for any n≥N then |an−a|<ε. Suppose k≥N. Then by construction then nk≥k≥N so then |ank−a|<ε as desired.
☐

Example of WCT

Consider the sequence:

(1,−1,1,−1,…)

we could use the Convergence of a Sequence definition to show this diverges. But we can also show that the subsequences a2n and a2n−1 for all n∈N are valid subsequences. They have different limits of -1 and 1 respectively. If an itself converged, then these subsequences need to converge to the same limit since Limits are Unique. But they don't, so then by our SCT then the original sequence cannot converge.

See also: Balzano-Weierstrass Theorem.