Prove Fibonacci identity using mathematical induction

In summary, the Fibonacci identity can be proven using mathematical induction by first establishing a base case for small values of Fibonacci numbers. Then, the inductive step involves assuming the identity holds for some integer \( n \) and demonstrating that it must also hold for \( n+1 \). This process confirms that the relationship between Fibonacci numbers, typically expressed as \( F_n = F_{n-1} + F_{n-2} \), is valid for all integers, thereby solidifying the identity through systematic reasoning.
  • #1
issacnewton
1,041
37
Homework Statement
Prove that ##n##th Fibanacci number ##F_n## is even if and only if ##3|n##
Relevant Equations
Mathematical Induction
Let ##P(n)## be the statement that

$$ F_n \text{ is even} \iff (3 \mid n) $$

Now, my base cases are ##n=1,2,3##. For ##n=1##, statement I have to prove is

$$ F_1 \text{ is even} \iff (3 \mid 1) $$

But since ##F_1 = 1## (Hence ##F_1## not even) and ##3 \nmid 1##, the above statement is vacuously true. Now, for ##n=2##, statement is

$$ F_2 \text{ is even} \iff (3 \mid 2) $$

But, since ##F_2 = 1## (Hence ##F_2## not even) and ##3 \nmid 2##, the above statement is vacuously true. Lastly, for ##n=3##, statement is

$$ F_3 \text{ is even} \iff (3 \mid 3) $$

Since ##F_3=2##, we have ##F_3## as even and ##3 \mid 3 ##. Since both antecedent and consequent are true, the biconditional is true. So, base cases are true. Now, let ## k \geqslant 3## be an arbitrary in ##\mathbb{N}##. And suppose that ##P(m)## is true for ##1 \leqslant m \leqslant k##. i.e.

$$ F_m \text{ is even} \iff (3 \mid m) $$

for ##1 \leqslant m \leqslant k##. I have to prove that ##P(k+1)## is true. I have to prove that

$$ F_{k+1} \text{ is even} \iff (3 \mid k+1) $$

Since this is biconditional statement, I will first prove forward direction

$$ F_{k+1} \text{ is even} \to (3 \mid k+1) $$

Suppose that ##F_{k+1}## is even. Now, ##F_{k+1} = F_k + F_{k-1} = 2 F_{k-1} + F_{k-2}##. Using this, I must have ##F_{k-2}## as even. Since ##k \geqslant 3##, it implies ##1 \leqslant k-2 \leqslant k##. Now, I can use the inductive hypothesis and conclude that ##3 \mid (k-2)##. This means that ##k-2 = 3 \alpha## for some ##\alpha \in \mathbb{Z}##. It follows that ##k +1 = 3 (\alpha + 1)## and ##3 \mid (k+1)##.
This proves the forward direction. Now, I have to prove the reverse direction

$$ (3 \mid k+1) \to F_{k+1} \text{ is even} $$

Suppose ##3 \mid (k+1)##. I will try to prove this with contradiction, so assume the opposite of consequent. Hence suppose that ##F_{k+1}## is odd. Since ##F_{k+1} = 2 F_{k-1} + F_{k-2}##, it must be true that ##F_{k-2}## is odd. As before, since ##1 \leqslant k-2 \leqslant k##, using contrapositive of inductive hypothesis

$$ (F_{k-2} \text{ is odd}) \to (3 \nmid k-2)$$

Hence, it must be true that ##3 \nmid (k-2)##. But, as ##3 \mid (k+1)##, I have ## (k+1) = 3 \alpha## and ##(k-2) = 3(\alpha -1)##. This means that ##3 \mid (k-2)##. But this is a contradiction. So, initial assumption that ##F_{k+1}## is odd, is wrong. Hence ##F_{k+1}## is even. This proves the reverse direction. Hence

$$ F_{k+1} \text{ is even} \iff (3 \mid k+1) $$

So, ##P(k+1)## is true. Using strong induction, this means that ##P(n)## is true for all ##n \in \mathbb{N}##.

Is this a correct proof ?
Thanks ##\smile##
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
It looks ok but I got a bit lost in the many cases you considered. You derived the essential formula
$$
F_{k+1}=2F_{k-1}+F_{k-2}
$$
which means that ##F_{k+1}\equiv F_{k-2}\pmod{2}## and ##F_{k-2} \equiv 0 \pmod{2} \Longleftrightarrow 3\,|\,(k-2)## by induction hypothesis. Both statements together are
$$
F_{k+1}\equiv F_{k-2}\equiv 0 \pmod{2} \Longleftrightarrow 3\,|\,(k-2).
$$
Remains to show that ##3\,|\,(k-2) \Longleftrightarrow 3\,|\,((k-2)+3) \Longleftrightarrow 3\,|\,(k+1).##

You had all the ingredients. I just cleaned your room a little bit.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes issacnewton
  • #3
I should learn to be more succinct. Thanks
 
  • Like
Likes Gavran
  • #4
The proof can be get by using ## m = 3n ##, ## m = 3n+1 ## and ## m = 3n+2 ##, where ## n \in \mathbb {N_0} ##.

## m = 3n ##
The base case: ## n = 0 ##, ## F_m = F_{3n} = F_0 = 0 ##.
The induction step: Suppose that for ## n = k ##, where ## k \gt 0 ##, ## F_m = F_{3n} = F_{3k} ## is even. Now it must be proved that for ## n = k+1 ##, ## F_m = F_{3n} = F_{3(k+1)} ## is even too.

The same approach can be applied for ## m = 3n+1 ## and for ## m = 3n+2 ##, when ## F_m ## are odd numbers.
 
  • Like
Likes issacnewton
  • #5
Alternatively, let ##P(n)## be that ##F_{3n}## is even, and ##F_{3n+1}## and ##F_{3n+2}## are odd. Starting with ##n =0##.
 
  • Like
Likes issacnewton

FAQ: Prove Fibonacci identity using mathematical induction

What is the Fibonacci identity?

The Fibonacci identity typically refers to various relationships involving Fibonacci numbers, such as the identity that states: F(n) = F(n-1) + F(n-2), where F(n) is the nth Fibonacci number. Another common identity is the sum of the first n Fibonacci numbers, which can be expressed as F(n+2) - 1.

What is mathematical induction?

Mathematical induction is a proof technique used to establish that a statement holds for all natural numbers. It consists of two steps: the base case, where the statement is verified for the initial value (usually n=1), and the inductive step, where one assumes the statement is true for n=k and then proves it for n=k+1.

How do you set up a proof by induction for a Fibonacci identity?

To set up a proof by induction for a Fibonacci identity, first, state the identity clearly. Then, verify the base case by showing that the identity holds for the initial value of n. Next, assume that the identity holds for n=k (inductive hypothesis) and use this assumption to prove that it also holds for n=k+1.

What is the base case for proving a Fibonacci identity?

The base case varies depending on the specific identity being proved. For example, if proving the identity F(n) = F(n-1) + F(n-2), the base case might be n=1 or n=2, where you can directly compute the Fibonacci numbers to show the identity holds true.

What are some common mistakes to avoid when using mathematical induction?

Common mistakes include failing to verify the base case, incorrectly applying the inductive hypothesis, or making logical errors in the inductive step. It's also important to ensure that the assumption for n=k is properly used to derive the case for n=k+1 without skipping any steps.

Similar threads

Back
Top