1

Is the converse of the alternating series test true? In other words, given a sequence $a_n>0$, with neither $a_{2n}$ nor $a_{2n-1}$ constant, for which there exists no positive $N$ such that $a_n>a_{n+1}$ for all $n>N$, does $\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^\infty (-1)^k a_k$ necessarily diverge? I've been unable to come up with any counterexamples, but I also can't figure out how to prove it.

Avi
  • 1,780
  • 11
  • 21

1 Answers1

2

No, just have the even terms be $1/n^2$ and the odd terms all be zero - that's not eventually monotone and the alternating sum converges.

Matt Rigby
  • 2,316
  • 12
  • 13
  • Fair enough; what if $a_k>0$? Your example is non-monotone, but the even and odd terms, taken separately, are both monotone, and one is a constant. I'll edit the question to be more clear. – Avi Sep 24 '14 at 10:50
  • 1
    $a_{2n} = 1/n^2$, $a_{2n+1} = 1/n^3$ has convergent alternating sum and fits the hypotheses of the edited question. I don't think there will be any meaningful converse to the alternating series test - if the alternating sum diverges, then in particular the sum is not absolutely convergent, so the hypotheses would have to also imply the series not being absolutely convergent. – Matt Rigby Sep 24 '14 at 10:58
  • 1
    Also, the contrapositive of the current statement is that anything with positive-valued with divergent alternating sum is eventually increasing, which can't be true – Matt Rigby Sep 24 '14 at 11:00
  • It could just be that it isn't eventually decreasing, rather than being eventually increasing, but point taken. – Avi Sep 24 '14 at 11:19