Can 4^n always be greater than or equal to n^4 for n ≥ 5?

  • Thread starter IntroAnalysis
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Proof
In summary, the problem statement is that for all n >/5, 4^n> (n^4) and the attempt at a solution is to show that 4^(k+1)> (k+1)^4. This is done by proving that (k+1)^4> (k+1)^2 for all k>=1, which is done by demonstrating that (k+1)^4> (k+1)^2 for all k>=1 by using the inequality 2<(n-1)2.
  • #1
IntroAnalysis
64
0

Homework Statement


n is an element of the Natural numbers, and n [itex]\geq5[/itex], then 4^n [itex]\geq(n^4)[/itex]


Homework Equations


Base case: n=5, then 4^5=1024 >or= 5^4=625 as required.


The Attempt at a Solution


Inductive step, assume k is an element of Natural numbers and 4^k > or = k^4.
Then we must show 4^(k+1) > or = (K+1)^4

What's the trick to showing this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
IntroAnalysis said:

Homework Statement


n is an element of the Natural numbers, and n [itex]\geq5[/itex], then 4^n [itex]\geq(n^4)[/itex]


Homework Equations


Base case: n=5, then 4^5=1024 ≥ 5^4=625 as required.


The Attempt at a Solution


Inductive step, assume k is an element of Natural numbers and 4^k ≥ k^4.
Then we must show 4^(k+1) ≥ (k+1)^4

What's the trick to showing this?
1. The problem statement, all variables and given known data

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution

What have you tried?
 
  • #3
I know that 4^(k + 1) =4(4^k) which helps since we know 4^k >/ k^4,

But (k + 1)^4 = k^4 + 4k^3 + 6k^2 + 2k + 1, and I don't know how to break this up

to show 4(4^k) >/ k^4 + 4k^3 + 6k^2 + 2k + 1
Any hints?
 
  • #4
IntroAnalysis said:
I know that 4^(k + 1) =4(4^k) which helps since we know 4^k >/ k^4,

But (k + 1)^4 = k^4 + 4k^3 + 6k^2 + 2k + 1, and I don't know how to break this up

to show 4(4^k) >/ k^4 + 4k^3 + 6k^2 + 2k + 1
Any hints?

RTP: 4n>n4 for all n≥5.
I'll skip the trivial n=5 case.

S(k): Assume; 4k>k4 for all k≥5.

S(k+1): RTP: 4k+1>(k+1)4
LHS=4k+1=4k*4>k4*4=4k4

Now consider; y=4x^4-(x+1)^4; Differentiate this and see what you can deduce for x≥5. Remember to restrict y after this to use on the induction. In restricting, change the domain and co-domain to an integer field.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
shaon0,

Do you realize that you are not supposed to give complete solutions?
 
  • #6
SammyS said:
shaon0,

Do you realize that you are not supposed to give complete solutions?

Yeah, sorry. Uhm, just told by a mod. Deleting the post. Sorry. He's not online, so hopefully he hasn't seen it. I've deleted it and left a hint.
 
  • #7
Actually, I think I found an easier solution. Can someone comment?

We previously proved that for all n >/5, 2^n> n^2. We proved 2^(n+1) > (n+1)^2.
Now since we know that 2 > 0 and n + 1 > 0 (since n >/5), we know that we can square both sides and the inequality still holds so: (2^(n + 1))^2 = 2^(2n + 2) = 2^[2*(n+1)]
=4^(n+1) > ((n+1)^2)^2 = (n+1)^4
Hence, we have 4^(n+1) > (n+1)^4 which is what we wanted to prove.
 
  • #8
IntroAnalysis said:
Actually, I think I found an easier solution. Can someone comment?

We previously proved that for all n >/5, 2^n> n^2. We proved 2^(n+1) > (n+1)^2.
Now since we know that 2 > 0 and n + 1 > 0 (since n >/5), we know that we can square both sides and the inequality still holds so: (2^(n + 1))^2 = 2^(2n + 2) = 2^[2*(n+1)]
=4^(n+1) > ((n+1)^2)^2 = (n+1)^4
Hence, we have 4^(n+1) > (n+1)^4 which is what we wanted to prove.

Yes, that's true but how would you have proven 2^n>n^2? As an extension; k^n>n^k for n,kEZ+
 
  • #9
Base case n = 5: 2^n (= 32) > n^2 (=25) is true as required.

Now we assume that the statement is true for some n an element of Natural numbers, n[itex]\geq5,[/itex], and show that it must be true for n + 1. We know n2< 2n and therefore 2n2<2n+1.
We are now going to use that 2n + 1 < n2 which is true for all
n[itex]\geq5[/itex]:

2n + 1 < n2 implies n2+2n +1 < 2n2< 2n+1 and therefore (n + 1)2< 2n+1.

We are therefore done if we can demonstrate that 2n +1 < n2 for all n [itex]\geq5[/itex]. This inequality is equivalent to 2 < (n - 1)2. The right side
is strictly increasing function of n for n > 1, thus (n - 1)2>(5 - 1)2= 16 > 2 for all n [itex]\geq5[/itex]. This completes the proof of the original inequality.

----------------------------------------
By the way, what does RTP stand for?
 
  • #10
Now consider; y=4x^4-(x+1)^4; Differentiate this and see what you can deduce for x≥5. Remember to restrict y after this to use on the induction. In restricting, change the domain and co-domain to an integer field.

So y = 4x4 - (x+1)4 = 4x4 - (x4 + 4x3 + 6x2 + 4x +1)

Then dy/dx = 12x3 -12x2 -12x -4 = 12x(x2-x -1) - 4
For x ≥ 5, (actually for x ≥ 2), dy/dx is positive. Thus, 4(x+1)must be greater than (x + 1)4. Is that it?
 

1. What is an inductive proof?

An inductive proof is a mathematical technique used to prove that a statement or formula is true for all cases in a sequence or pattern. It involves showing that the statement is true for the first case, and then using that information to prove that it is also true for the next case, and so on.

2. How is an inductive proof different from a deductive proof?

In an inductive proof, the statement is shown to be true for a specific case, and then generalized to prove that it is true for all cases. In a deductive proof, the statement is shown to be true based on logical reasoning and previously established truths.

3. What does "4^n >/ n^4" mean?

"4^n >/ n^4" is a mathematical statement that means "4 raised to the power of n is greater than n raised to the power of 4." In other words, as n increases, 4^n becomes larger than n^4.

4. What is the purpose of proving "4^n >/ n^4" using induction?

The purpose of proving "4^n >/ n^4" using induction is to demonstrate that the statement is true for all cases, not just one specific case. This provides a stronger proof of the statement's validity and can be applied to various mathematical problems and equations.

5. Can the inductive proof be applied to other mathematical statements?

Yes, the inductive proof can be applied to other mathematical statements that follow a similar sequence or pattern. It is a commonly used proof technique in various branches of mathematics, including algebra, number theory, and calculus.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
548
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
503
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
737
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
Back
Top