Using substitution in an inductive proof

In summary, proof by induction involves showing that a statement is true for a simple case and then assuming it is true for all integers up to a given value and proving that it holds for the next integer. This allows you to prove the statement for all integers. However, it does not help in coming up with the initial hypothesis, which must be done by other means.
  • #1
dane502
21
0
I am to prove something inductively. Can one substitute as follows?

For the inductive part, assume that
(*) n_k < n_(k+1)

In order to show that this implies:
(**) n_(k+1) < n_(k+2),

Can one then simply make the substitution k+1 = s in (**), yielding
n_(s) < n_(s+1)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The answer is yes, if the assumption is that it holds for all k.

Usually though, in an inductive prove you assume that (*) only holds for all k up to some fixed value (say, K) and you want to prove that it also holds for k = K + 1.
 
  • #3
Okay, so if my proof consisted of proving, that
n_1 < n_2

and then using the "induction" used in my previous post, it wouldn't complete the proof that

n_k < n_(k+1) for all integers, k?
 
  • #4
No, unfortunately not.

As a very simple example, consider nk = k4 - 2 k2.
It is very easy to show that [itex]0 = n_0 > n_1 = -1[/itex], but [itex]n_k < n_{k + 1}[/itex] for all other k (so if you take 2k2 - k4 to flip the < and > signs in my example and shift the whole sequence by 1 you will get precisely what you asked, starting at k = 1).

The idea of induction is, that if you know that a statement holds for all integers up to some value, you can prove it for the next one. And then if it holds up to k = 1, you have shown that it holds for k = 2, from which it follows for k = 3, hence for k= 4 ,etc.
 
  • #5
Here is a post that I wrote earlier, that tries to explain proof by induction in more detail. Hopefully it helps.

Generally, when you have some statement like "for all n, X is true", a proof by induction consists of two steps. First, you have to show that for some simple case (usually n = 0 or 1, depending on the question), X is true. Then you assume that X is true for all integers n up to some given value n0, and you prove that under that assumption, X is also true for n0 + 1.

The reasoning is then as follows: you have checked by hand that it is true for n = 1. You have proven that if it is true for n0 = 1 (which it is), then it is true for n = n0 + 1 = 2. So it is true for n = 2. Also, you have shown that if it is true for n = 2, it is true for n = 3. Since it is true for n = 2, it holds for n = 3. Similarly, it is true for n = 4, and for n = 5, and so on.

Note that proof by induction is a convenient way (once you are used to it) to prove such statements "for all n", but it doesn't help you to find the statement. So if instead of "prove that the nth derivative is ...formula..." you get "derive and prove a formula for the nth derivative", you will first need to come up with a hypothesis by some other way. Once you have the hypothesis, you can make it into a theorem and try to prove it by induction.
 

FAQ: Using substitution in an inductive proof

What is substitution in an inductive proof?

Substitution in an inductive proof is a process of replacing a variable or expression with another variable or expression in order to prove a statement or theorem. It is a commonly used technique in mathematical and scientific reasoning.

Why is substitution important in inductive proofs?

Substitution is important in inductive proofs because it allows us to generalize a statement or theorem to an infinite number of cases. By replacing the variable or expression with a different value, we can demonstrate that the statement holds true for all possible values, providing a stronger and more comprehensive proof.

How does substitution work in an inductive proof?

In an inductive proof, substitution involves using the inductive hypothesis, which is the assumption that the statement holds true for a specific value or case, and then substituting that value into the statement to show that it also holds true for the next case. This process is repeated until the statement is proven to hold true for all cases.

What are some common mistakes to avoid when using substitution in an inductive proof?

One common mistake to avoid when using substitution in an inductive proof is assuming that the statement holds true for all cases without properly demonstrating it for each case. Another mistake is using an incorrect or unrelated value for the substitution, which can lead to an incorrect proof. It is important to carefully follow the steps of substitution and make sure it is applied correctly in each case.

Can substitution be used in all inductive proofs?

Yes, substitution can be used in all inductive proofs as it is a fundamental technique in mathematical and scientific reasoning. It is especially useful in proofs involving recursive or iterative processes, where the value of a variable changes with each iteration. However, it is important to note that substitution may not always be the most efficient or straightforward method in certain proofs, and alternative approaches may be more appropriate.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
684
Replies
5
Views
960
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top