Proving Divisibility by 6 Using Mathematical Induction

  • MHB
  • Thread starter Monoxdifly
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Induction
In summary: Yes)In summary, to prove that n(n + 1)(n + 2) is divisible by 6 for any integer n, we can use mathematical induction. By assuming that the statement is true for n = k, we can show that it holds for n = k + 1 by adding 3(k + 1)(k + 2) to the original statement. This gives us 3(n + 1)(n + 2), which can be rewritten as 6 times the summation of the first n + 1 natural numbers. This proves that the statement is true for n = k + 1, and therefore true for all integers n.
  • #1
Monoxdifly
MHB
284
0
Prove that n(n + 1)(n + 2) is divisible by 6 for any integer n

What I have done so far:

For n = 1
1(1 + 1)(1 + 2) = 1(2)(3) = 6(1) = 6
6 is divisible by 6 (TRUE)

For n = k
k(k + 1)(k + 2) is divisible 6 (ASSUMED AS TRUE)

For n = k + 1
(k + 1)(k + 2)(k + 3) = k(k + 1)(k + 2) + 3(k + 1)(k + 2)

What am I supposed to do from here onward?

Yes, I know that:
k(k + 1)(k + 2) is divisible by 6
(k + 1) and (k + 2) are subsequent numbers so that its product is even or divisible by 2. Because (k + 1)(k + 2) is divisible by 2 then 3(k + 1)(k + 2) is divisible by 6.
Because k(k + 1)(k + 2) is divisible by 6 and 3(k + 1)(k + 2) is divisible by 6 then k(k + 1)(k + 2) + 3(k + 1)(k + 2) is divisible by 6 (PROVEN TRUE)

However, I am not sure if that follows the standard procedure of mathematical induction. Can someone please show me the "proper" "formal" way using mathematical induction continued from the bolded part?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I think I would give $P_n$ as:

\(\displaystyle n(n+1)(n+2)=6k\) where \(\displaystyle k\in\mathbb{N}\)

Now, as your induction step, I would look at adding:

\(\displaystyle (n+1)(n+2)(n+3)-n(n+1)(n+2)=3(n+1)(n+2)=6\sum_{j=1}^{n+1}(j)\)

to $P_n$.
 
  • #3
How can we be sure that 3(n + 1)(n + 2) is divisible by 6 without the "theory" approach I wrote in my initial post?
 
  • #4
Monoxdifly said:
How can we be sure that 3(n + 1)(n + 2) is divisible by 6 without the "theory" approach I wrote in my initial post?

By using the summation formula instead. Or, you could prove that $n(n+1)$ is even by induction...:)
 
  • #5
Means we have to use double induction?
 
  • #6
Monoxdifly said:
How can we be sure that 3(n + 1)(n + 2) is divisible by 6 without the "theory" approach I wrote in my initial post?
Either $n$ is even or $n$ is odd. If $n$ is even, let $n=2k$ then we have $3(n+1)(n+2) = 6(k+1)(2k+1)$. If $n$ is odd then let $n=2k+1$ which gives $6(k+1)(2k+3)$.
 
  • #7
June29 said:
Either $n$ is even or $n$ is odd. If $n$ is even, let $n=2k$ then we have $3(n+1)(n+2) = 6(k+1)(2k+1)$. If $n$ is odd then let $n=2k+1$ which gives $6(k+1)(2k+3)$.

That's likely the most straightforward way to proceed. (Yes)
 
  • #8
I also like $\displaystyle 3(n+1)(n+2) = 6 \binom{n+2}{2}$, which in a sense is your summation method in disguise.
 

FAQ: Proving Divisibility by 6 Using Mathematical Induction

What is the principle of mathematical induction?

The principle of mathematical induction is a proof technique used to establish the truth of an infinite set of statements. It involves proving a base case and then showing that if a statement is true for one case, it is also true for the next case in the sequence.

How do you use mathematical induction to prove a statement?

To use mathematical induction, you first prove that the statement is true for the base case. Then, assuming the statement is true for a case, you use that assumption to prove that it is also true for the next case in the sequence. This process is repeated until you have shown that the statement is true for all cases in the sequence.

What types of statements can be proven using mathematical induction?

Mathematical induction is typically used to prove statements about natural numbers, such as equations or inequalities. However, it can also be used to prove statements about other mathematical objects, such as sets or functions.

Can mathematical induction be used to prove all mathematical statements?

No, mathematical induction can only be used to prove statements that follow a certain pattern or sequence. It cannot be used to prove statements that do not have a clear base case and recursive step.

Are there any common mistakes to avoid when using mathematical induction?

One common mistake when using mathematical induction is assuming that a statement is true for all cases without properly proving it for each case. Another mistake is using the wrong base case or incorrectly applying the recursive step. It is important to carefully and logically go through each step when using mathematical induction.

Similar threads

Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top