Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Merged by Bors] - feat: bounds on alternating convergent series #10120

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

@Parcly-Taxel Parcly-Taxel added awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR t-analysis Analysis (normed *, calculus) labels Jan 30, 2024

/-- Partial sums of an alternating antitone series with an even number of terms provide
lower bounds on the limit. -/
theorem Antitone.alternating_series_le_tendsto (hfa : Antitone f) (k : ℕ) :
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You should be able to reduce that to Monotone.tendsto_le_alternating_series applied to -f (and similarly for the next result).
Possibly the intermediate result in the have would make sense as a separate lemma (in all four versions, but with essentially only two proofs).

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@Parcly-Taxel Parcly-Taxel Jan 30, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I need an extra ContinuousNeg E assumption to go through that route. Indeed the theorems as their preconditions are set up now work even when E = Rat.



variable {E : Type*} [OrderedRing E] [TopologicalSpace E] [OrderClosedTopology E]
{l : E} {f : ℕ → E} (hfl : Tendsto (fun n ↦ ∑ i in range n, (-1) ^ i * f i) atTop (𝓝 l))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Prop assumptions like hfl should be mentioned in the theorems, not in the variable line: the reason is that otherwise the file is very hard to understand for the readers, as they don't know which assumptions are used.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done.

@sgouezel sgouezel added awaiting-author A reviewer has asked the author a question or requested changes and removed awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR labels Feb 9, 2024
@Parcly-Taxel Parcly-Taxel added awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR and removed awaiting-author A reviewer has asked the author a question or requested changes labels Feb 10, 2024
Copy link
Member

@jcommelin jcommelin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks 🎉

bors merge

@mathlib-bors
Copy link
Contributor

mathlib-bors bot commented Feb 13, 2024

Build failed (retrying...):

@mathlib-bors
Copy link
Contributor

mathlib-bors bot commented Feb 13, 2024

Build failed (retrying...):

@mathlib-bors
Copy link
Contributor

mathlib-bors bot commented Feb 13, 2024

Pull request successfully merged into master.

Build succeeded:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ready-to-merge This PR has been sent to bors. t-analysis Analysis (normed *, calculus)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants