03/11/2008, 10:24 AM
Mmmm!
I think that we should have: [n -> + oo] lim (b[n](-k)) = -k + 1. In all other situations, b[n](-k) would depend on both n and k. Am I right ?
But, perhaps I misunderstood the question.
I think that we should have: [n -> + oo] lim (b[n](-k)) = -k + 1. In all other situations, b[n](-k) would depend on both n and k. Am I right ?
But, perhaps I misunderstood the question.