Let (an)n⩾1 be a sequence of real numbers. Suppose that
an+m⩽an+am
for all n⩾1 and all m⩾1. Then the sequence (an/n)n⩾1 converges and satisfies
limn→+∞nan= infn⩾1nan.
Put a0=0 ; the inequality an+m⩽an+am remains valid for all n⩾ 0 and all m⩾0. Fix an integer m⩾ 1. For every integer n⩾1, let q(n) and r(n) be the integers such that n=q(n)m+r(n) and 0⩽r(n)<m (E, III, p. 39, th. 1). The hypothesis then implies
nan⩽naq(n)m+nar(n)⩽nq(n)am+nar(n)⩽nq(n)am+nm
Letting n tend to +∞, we deduce that lim supn(an/n)⩽am/m since q(n)/n→1/m. Since this holds for every m⩾1, we therefore have
lim supn→+∞nan⩽ infm⩾1mam⩽ lim infn→+∞nan.
These inequalities prove the convergence of the sequence (an/n)n⩾1 as well as the formula lim an/n= infn⩾1an/n.
Bourbaki sets the proof directly after the statement, and the corpus does not separate them, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.
Nothing.
Nothing.