How Fast Does Iterated Sine Die?
Pick any and define
- Show that .
- Main question: Find the exact rate. Prove that
independently of the starting point .
Hint (only if stuck): Rather than tracking directly, look for a function such that tends to a nonzero constant.
Field: Real analysis (sequences, asymptotics)
Why it's interesting: Press the sin key on a calculator over and over. The display creeps toward , but very slowly. Since near , each step barely moves the point. The surprise is that this slow decay has a sharp, universal law. Every starting point ends up with , and the constant comes straight from the term of the Taylor series. The problem shows a general idea: to find the decay rate of a slowly converging iteration, change variables until the iteration becomes approximately "add a constant."
Key technique: Find a quantity that grows linearly. Then apply Stolz–Cesàro (Cesàro averaging of increments).
Difficulty: 2 / 5
Answer: How Fast Does Iterated Sine Die?
Key Idea / Intuition
Near we have . Each step therefore subtracts about . Think of as continuous time. The iteration then looks like the ODE
This separates to , so should grow linearly with slope . That gives .
The rigorous proof follows the same idea in three steps:
- Show the increments tend to .
- Average them (Cesàro).
- Conclude that .
Formal Proof / Solution
Step 1:
Since , we get .
For we have . By induction, is strictly decreasing and positive. It therefore converges to some limit .
By continuity of , the limit satisfies . The only solution in is . So , with for all .
Step 2: The increments of tend to
Let . Then
From we get
Hence, as :
Since , it follows that
Step 3: Cesàro averaging (Stolz–Cesàro)
Claim. If , then .
Proof. Write . Fix and choose with for . For :
Here does not depend on . Taking gives . Since was arbitrary, the claim follows.
Apply the claim with :
using in the last step.
Remarks
-
Why disappears. The starting point only affects finitely many early increments . Cesàro averaging washes these out, since they contribute . This is why the limit is universal.
-
The general principle. Suppose with and . The same argument applied to gives
For , take and . This gives .
-
Finer asymptotics. Pushing the expansion one order further shows that the next correction to has order . So the convergence to is genuinely slow, which you can see numerically.
-
Calculator check. Start from and take . Then , which is already close to the true .
Source: Classical folklore (cf. Pólya–Szegő, Problems and Theorems in Analysis I)