Prove by the principle of induction

In summary: P(n+1) can be rewritten as$$2^{n+1}\cdot 1\cdot 3 \ldots (2n+1) = 2^{n+1}\cdot \prod_{k=1}^{2n+1}(2k-1)$$The equation for P(n) can be rewritten as$$P(n)\, : \,\dfrac{(2n)!}{n!}=2^n\cdot \prod_{k=1}^{2n-1}(2k-1)$$The induction hypothesis can be rewritten as$$
  • #1
acrobaticelectron
13
0
Homework Statement
I must find if this expression is true for any natural number
Relevant Equations
(n+n)=2^n(2n-1)
svg.image
(expression given to be proven)
check for p(1)... 2=2
svg.image

substitute (n+n) to
svg.image


And here is the problem, I just can't find a way to continue solving this problem
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Maybe I am missing something. Try plugging in a number like n=5.
 
  • Like
Likes topsquark
  • #3
FactChecker said:
Maybe I am missing something. Try plugging in a number like n=5.
Maybe my understanding of the definition hasn't been correct, this is the exact definition of the exercise, thanks for your reply :)
1663016658036.png
 
  • #4
Yes, that is very different. You have proven it is true for n=1. Now assume that it is true for a general n (including n=1) and see if you can use that to prove it is true for n+1.
So you want to prove that ##((n+1)+1)\cdot((n+1)+2)\cdot\cdot\cdot((n+1)+(n+1)) = 2^{n+1}\cdot 1\cdot 3\cdot 5\cdot\cdot\cdot(2(n+1)-1)##
Try to reorganize that equation into one that relates to the n-equation that is assumed to be true.
 
  • Like
Likes acrobaticelectron
  • #5
acrobaticelectron said:
Homework Statement:: I must find if this expression is true for any natural number
Relevant Equations:: (n+n)=2^n(2n-1)

svg.image
(expression given to be proven)
check for p(1)... 2=2
svg.image

substitute (n+n) to
svg.image


And here is the problem, I just can't find a way to continue solving this problem
The formula in your revised version can be written as
$$
P(n)\, : \,\dfrac{(2n)!}{n!}=2^n\cdot \prod_{k=1}^{2n-1}(2k-1)
$$
You are correct with your induction base: ##\dfrac{(2\cdot 1)!}{1!}=2=2^1 \cdot \prod_{k=1}^1(2k-1).##

Next, you may assume that ##P(n)## is true (the induction hypothesis). You can also assume that ##P(m)## is true for all ##m\leq n## but I don't think this is necessary.

Finally (the induction step), we must somehow prove ##P(n+1).## The advantage of a proof by induction is, that we can use ##P(n)## as a proven statement. However, ##P(n+1)## is what we must show.

That is
$$
P(n+1)\, : \,\dfrac{(2n+2)!}{(n+1)!}=(n+2)(n+3)\ldots (2n+2)\stackrel{!}{=}2^{n+1}\cdot 1\cdot 3 \ldots (2n+1)=2^{n+1}\cdot \prod_{k=1}^{2n+1}(2k-1)
$$

You must prove ##(!)##. The way to do it, is to bring it into a form where you can apply ##P(n).##

Hint: Start on the right and write the product as ##c(n)\cdot 2^n\cdot \prod_{k=1}^{2n-1}(2k-1)## with some integer ##c(n)## and apply the induction hypothesis to it. Then bring it into the requested form on the left.
 
  • Like
Likes acrobaticelectron
  • #6
FactChecker said:
Yes, that is very different. You have proven it is true for n=1. Now assume that it is true for a general n (including n=1) and see if you can use that to prove it is true for n+1.
So you want to prove that ##((n+1)+1)\cdot((n+1)+2)\cdot\cdot\cdot((n+1)+(n+1)) = 2^{n+1}\cdot 1\cdot 3\cdot 5\cdot\cdot\cdot(2(n+1)-1)##
Try to reorganize that equation into one that relates to the n-equation that is assumed to be true.
Thanks for your answer! I apreciate it , however my problem comes when I have to relate the equations, I am just not able to get the "right side" of the equation
 
  • #7
fresh_42 said:
The formula in your revised version can be written as
$$
P(n)\, : \,\dfrac{(2n)!}{n!}=2^n\cdot \prod_{k=1}^{2n-1}(2k-1)
$$
You are correct with your induction base: ##\dfrac{(2\cdot 1)!}{1!}=2=2^1 \cdot \prod_{k=1}^1(2k-1).##

Next, you may assume that ##P(n)## is true (the induction hypothesis). You can also assume that ##P(m)## is true for all ##m\leq n## but I don't think this is necessary.

Finally (the induction step), we must somehow prove ##P(n+1).## The advantage of a proof by induction is, that we can use ##P(n)## as a proven statement. However, ##P(n+1)## is what we must show.

That is
$$
P(n+1)\, : \,\dfrac{(2n+2)!}{(n+1)!}=(n+2)(n+3)\ldots (2n+2)\stackrel{!}{=}2^{n+1}\cdot 1\cdot 3 \ldots (2n+1)=2^{n+1}\cdot \prod_{k=1}^{2n+1}(2k-1)
$$

You must prove ##(!)##. The way to do it, is to bring it into a form where you can apply ##P(n).##

Hint: Start on the right and write the product as ##c(n)\cdot 2^n\cdot \prod_{k=1}^{2n-1}(2k-1)## with some integer ##c(n)## and apply the induction hypothesis to it. Then bring it into the requested form on the left.
Thanks for the detailed answer, it really gives me some insight on the exercise. Right now I am a first year engineering student so I'm not really able to understand how you get the intuition to just convert one expression to one another, i would like to know what rule did you follow so I can learn it myself, thanks a lot!
 
  • #8
acrobaticelectron said:
Thanks for your answer! I apreciate it , however my problem comes when I have to relate the equations, I am just not able to get the "right side" of the equation
As a homework problem, you will have to show us your work and we can make suggestions.
Try to rewrite each side into a form that uses the n-equation of that side.
 
  • #9
acrobaticelectron said:
Right now I am a first year engineering student so I'm not really able to understand how you get the intuition to just convert one expression to one another
Say ##P(n)\, : \,LHS(n)=RHS(n).## Then we must show ##P(n+1)\, : \,LHS(n+1)=RHS(n+1).##

So we start with
\begin{align*}
RHS(n+1)&=2^{n+1}\cdot 1\cdot 3\cdot 5 \cdot\ldots\cdot (2(n+1)-1)\\
&=2\cdot \left(2^{n}\cdot 1\cdot 3\cdot 5 \cdot\ldots\cdot (2n-1)\right)\cdot (2n+1)\\
&=2\cdot (2n+1)\cdot RHS(n)\\
&\stackrel{induction}{=}2\cdot (2n+1)\cdot LHS(n)\\
&\ldots \text{ etc. } \ldots\\
&=LHS(n+1)
\end{align*}
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
  • #10
FactChecker said:
As a homework problem, you will have to show us your work and we can make suggestions.
Try to rewrite each side into a form that uses the n-equation of that side.
Hi, this is my work so far:

p(n)=(n+1)(n+2)(n+3)...(n+n)=2^n*1*3*5...(2n-1)

p(n+1)= (n+1+1)(n+2+1)(n+3+1)...(n+n)*(n+n+1)=2^(n+1)*1*3*5...(2n+1)

(n+1+1)(n+2+1)(n+3+1)...2^n*1*3*5...(2n-1)(n+n+1)=2^(n+1)*1*3*5...(2n+1)
this is were I get stuck, I'm just not able to solve this relationship
 
  • #11
acrobaticelectron said:
Hi, this is my work so far:

p(n)=(n+1)(n+2)(n+3)...(n+n)=2^n*1*3*5...(2n-1)

p(n+1)= (n+1+1)(n+2+1)(n+3+1)...(n+n)*(n+n+1)=2^(n+1)*1*3*5...(2n+1)

(n+1+1)(n+2+1)(n+3+1)...2^n*1*3*5...(2n-1)(n+n+1)=2^(n+1)*1*3*5...(2n+1)
this is were I get stuck, I'm just not able to solve this relationship
If you study post #9 and re-substitute my variables ##LHS(n)=\dfrac{(2n)!}{n!}## you will almost get the complete solution. It is important that you understand why these equations are there.
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
  • #12
acrobaticelectron said:
Hi, this is my work so far:

p(n)=(n+1)(n+2)(n+3)...(n+n)=2^n*1*3*5...(2n-1)

p(n+1)= (n+1+1)(n+2+1)(n+3+1)...(n+n)*(n+n+1)=2^(n+1)*1*3*5...(2n+1)

(n+1+1)(n+2+1)(n+3+1)...2^n*1*3*5...(2n-1)(n+n+1)=2^(n+1)*1*3*5...(2n+1)
this is were I get stuck, I'm just not able to solve this relationship
You don't want to "solve this relationship". You want to simplify both sides in "equal ways" to get two sides that are clearly equal.
Consider the right side. ##2^{n+1}=2\cdot 2^n## and ##1\cdot 3\cdot 5\cdot \cdot\cdot\cdot (2n-1)\cdot (2n+1) = [1\cdot 3\cdot 5\cdot \cdot\cdot\cdot (2n-1)] \cdot (2n+1)##
So ##RHS_{n+1} = 2\cdot RHS_n \cdot (2n+1) = 2\cdot (2n+1)\cdot RHS_n##.
Now do the same kind of thing with the left side. Then use the assumed fact that ##LHS_n = RHS_n## to divide out those factors from both sides. See where that goes.
Use that ##A\cdot LHS_n = B \cdot RHS_n \iff A=B##
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes fresh_42
  • #13
acrobaticelectron said:
Thanks for the detailed answer, it really gives me some insight on the exercise. Right now I am a first year engineering student so I'm not really able to understand how you get the intuition to just convert one expression to one another, i would like to know what rule did you follow so I can learn it myself, thanks a lot!
There's no intuition required, only a solid mathematical technique. It's just the discipline to follow the inductive steps without getting your logic all mixed up.

In this case the answer drops out from no more than technique. No special algebraic tricks are required.
 
  • #14
It may be worth describing the basic induction technique. Rather than RHS and LHS, I'll use ##a(n)## and ##b(n)##.

In general we want to prove that$$\forall n \ge 1: a(n) = b(n)$$The idea of induction is that we can prove this by showing that$$a(1)=b(1)$$and$$\forall n \ge 1: a(n) = b(n) \Rightarrow a(n+1) = b(n+1)$$The basic technique to do this has several steps:

1) Show that ##a(1) = b(1)## by direct computation.

2) Assume that for some fixed value of ##n## we have ##a(n) = b(n)##. We assume nothing about ##n## other than it is some number ##\ge 1##.

3) Write down the expression for ##a(n+1)##. This is done simply by plugging ##n+1## into the formula for ##a##.

4) Express ##a(n+1)## in terms of ##a(n)##. For example, it may be something of the form$$a(n+1) = ca(n) + d$$5) We know ##a(n) = b(n)## so we can express ##a(n+1)## in terms of ##b(n)##. E.g. $$a(n+1) = cb(n) + d$$.6) Show that this expression equals ##b(n+1)##. E.g. Show that$$cb(n) + d = b(n+1)$$Then we are done. Note that this last step may be simple or tricky. You may have to do a lot of work here.

That's the basic technique in cases like this and is perhaps a good introduction to thinking logically. In any case, steps 1-6 should make perfect sense before you tackle an inductive proof.
 
  • #15
acrobaticelectron said:
Hi, this is my work so far:

p(n)=(n+1)(n+2)(n+3)...(n+n)=2^n*1*3*5...(2n-1)

p(n+1)= (n+1+1)(n+2+1)(n+3+1)...(n+n)*(n+n+1)=2^(n+1)*1*3*5...(2n+1)

(n+1+1)(n+2+1)(n+3+1)...2^n*1*3*5...(2n-1)(n+n+1)=2^(n+1)*1*3*5...(2n+1)
this is were I get stuck, I'm just not able to solve this relationship
You have a error in your expression for proposition, ##P(n+1)##. It may be helpful to write it as follows.

##P(n+1)## states that

##((n\!+\!1)\!+\!1)((n\!+\!1)+2)((n\!+\!1)\!+\!3),,,((n\!+\!1)\!+\!n)((n\!+\!1)\!+n\!+\!1)
=2^{n+1}\!\cdot1\cdot3\cdot5\cdots(2(n\!+\!1)-\!1)##

Simplifying this (and listing some additional factors) gives for ##P(n+1)##:

##(n\!+\!2)(n\!+\!3)(n\!+\!4),,,(2n)(2n\!+\!1)(2n\!+\!2) =
2^{n+1}\!\cdot1\cdot3\cdot5\cdots(2n\!-\!1)(2n\!+\!1)##

Compare that with your expression for ##P(n)## to see how to get from ##P(n)## to ##P(n+1)##.
 

FAQ: Prove by the principle of induction

What is the principle of induction?

The principle of induction is a mathematical proof technique that is used to prove a statement for all natural numbers. It is based on the idea that if a statement is true for a starting value (usually 0 or 1) and can be shown to be true for the next value, then it must be true for all subsequent values.

How does the principle of induction work?

The principle of induction works by first showing that a statement is true for a starting value (known as the base case). Then, it is assumed that the statement is true for a specific value (known as the induction hypothesis). Using this assumption, the statement is then proven to be true for the next value (known as the induction step). This process is repeated until the statement is shown to be true for all subsequent values.

What is the difference between strong and weak induction?

Strong induction is a variation of the principle of induction where, instead of assuming that the statement is true for a specific value, it is assumed to be true for all values up to and including that value. This allows for a stronger proof as it takes into account multiple previous values. Weak induction, on the other hand, only assumes that the statement is true for a specific value and the next value. Both methods can be used to prove statements by induction, but strong induction is typically more powerful.

What types of statements can be proven by the principle of induction?

The principle of induction is typically used to prove statements about natural numbers, such as properties of sequences, series, and mathematical formulas. It can also be used to prove statements about recursive functions and data structures. However, it cannot be used to prove statements about real numbers or other non-discrete values.

What are some common mistakes when using the principle of induction?

One common mistake when using the principle of induction is assuming that the statement is true for all natural numbers without first proving the base case. Another mistake is using strong induction when weak induction would suffice, which can make the proof unnecessarily complicated. It is also important to make sure that the induction step is valid and that all necessary assumptions are made in the induction hypothesis.

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
994
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
5K
Replies
11
Views
1K
Back
Top