Inductive proof that (n)^2 >n^n for n≥3

  • Thread starter fanofphysics
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Proof
In summary, ArcanaNoir can't seem to correctly express the proof for the inequality n + 1 > n^{\;n} for n≥3, and is looking for help. Dickfore provides a hint on how to do the proof and suggests that if ArcanaNoir can work out the algebra on his own, he is allowed to post the solution. After ArcanaNoir re-writes the proof going the other direction, Dickfore scans the proof and provides a link to it.ArcanaNoir is still new to this forum and is looking for help with his homework.
  • #1
fanofphysics
5
0

Homework Statement


Give an inductive proof that (n!)^2 > n^n for n≥3


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


The case n=3 is easy (3! = 6, 6^2 = 6; 3^3 = 27; 36>27 : QED)

I can write out/expand ((n+1)!)^2 and (n+1)^(n+1), but I'm lost trying to manipulate the resulting expressions to prove the LHS > RHS.

Help please.

(First post here, please be gentle)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You are not using the Inductive method. You must assume that the inequality is true for some [itex]n = k \ge 3[/itex] and then prove its validity for [itex]n = k + 1[/itex] using that assumption.
 
  • #3
For now, I will only give you the hint that the following inequality holds:
[tex]
n + 1 > \left(1 + \frac{1}{n}\right)^{\; n} , \; n \ge 2,
[/tex]
which is trivial if you know the meaning of the sequence on the right.
 
  • #4
Thanks very much Dickfore!

It's not that I don't (didn't) know how to do an induction proof, but that I expressed myself wrongly. Also, I see you can use symbols (Latex?), which is good, but I need to learn how myself.

I'll work on this, with your hint. If I can work it out myself, is it OK to post the solution? Or is it better just that I know, myself, how to do it? Sorry, but I'm new, and I don't know the ropes (but I'm extremely happy to have found this forum!)
 
  • #5
If you're just stuck on the algebra, maybe you could scan your work and post it as an image and we could point you in the right direction?
 
  • #6
fanofphysics said:
I'll work on this, with your hint. If I can work it out myself, is it OK to post the solution? Or is it better just that I know, myself, how to do it? Sorry, but I'm new, and I don't know the ropes (but I'm extremely happy to have found this forum!)

If you find the solution, using the hint I gave, would you mind scanning it and attaching it here in case you cannot write it out in LaTeX? After that, we can go on and justify the inequality. I strongly encourage you to try and master LaTeX as it is very useful in communicating mathematical ideas.
 
  • #7
Ditto about latex, but your first post isn't really the time to try it out on a long string of algebra, unless you have a LOT of time... I find it's better to learn starting on single equations.
 
  • #8
(n+1)^(n+1) = (n+1)(n+1)^n - by definition
= (n+1) ((1+1/n)^n) n^n - because (n+1) = n(1+1/n)
< (n+1) ((1+1/n)^n) (n!)^2 - per the inductive method
< (n+1)(n+1) (n!)^2 (n≥2) - per Dickfore's hint
= ((n+1)^2) (n!)^2
= ((n+1)!)^2 - by definition

-> (n+1)^(n+1) < ((n+1)!)^2 QED

Pretty ugly to read, and incredibly easy to mis-type, but a sound, inductive, proof nonetheless.

At least I think so.

Yes, ArcanaNoir, I will be investing the time to learn Latex.

That leaves just the inequality in Dickfore's post; it's obviously true, and relatively easy to prove, which I've done (but I'll post the proof in a later post, if you guys think it would be good, in terms of my learning this stuff).

So, a REALLY BIG THANK YOU! :smile:
 
  • #9
Problem statement:
[tex]
\left(n!\right)^{\;n} > n^{\;n} , n \ge 3
[/tex]

Proof (a couple of lines anyway):

[tex]
\left(n + 1\right)^{\;\left(n+1\right)} =\left(n + 1\right) \left(n + 1\right)^{\;n} [/tex] - by definition
[tex]
= \left(n + 1\right) n^{\;n} \left(1 + \frac{1}{n}\right)^{\; n} [/tex] - because ...

OK, so that kinda works, but there are some aspects I don't understand yet ...
 
  • #10
What happened to the factorial?
 
  • #11
He's proving it from the right to the left.
 
  • #12
ooh.
 
  • #13
Dickfore said:
He's proving it from the right to the left.
Oh dear, is that a mistake? :redface:

Does it make the proof wrong? :cry:

I think I could re-write it, going the other way, and maybe even using Latex (though I still haven't got the hang of how to get the number of spaces right, nor the line spacing ...).
 

FAQ: Inductive proof that (n)^2 >n^n for n≥3

What is an inductive proof?

An inductive proof is a mathematical technique used to prove that a statement is true for all values of a variable. It involves showing that the statement is true for a base case, and then using logical steps to show that if the statement is true for a particular value, it must also be true for the next value.

What is the statement being proved?

The statement being proved is that (n)^2 > n^n for n≥3. This means that for all values of n greater than or equal to 3, the square of n is always greater than n raised to the power of n.

How is the inductive proof structured?

The inductive proof for (n)^2 > n^n for n≥3 is typically structured into three steps: the base case, the inductive hypothesis, and the inductive step. The base case involves showing that the statement is true for the first value of n, which in this case is n=3. The inductive hypothesis assumes that the statement is true for a particular value of n, and the inductive step uses this assumption to show that the statement must also be true for the next value of n.

What is the key to a successful inductive proof?

The key to a successful inductive proof is to clearly define the base case, the inductive hypothesis, and the inductive step. It is also important to use logical steps and mathematical principles to show that the statement is true for all values of n, not just a few specific values.

Why is an inductive proof important?

An inductive proof is important because it allows us to prove that a statement is true for an infinite number of values without having to individually test each value. It also helps to build a stronger understanding of mathematical concepts and principles.

Back
Top