What are the steps to prove 2^n < n! using induction?

  • Thread starter Thread starter joshanders_84
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Induction Proof
Click For Summary
To prove that 2^n < n! for n >= 4 using induction, start with the base case of n = 4, which holds true. The inductive hypothesis assumes that n! > 2^n for n >= 4. To prove the case for n + 1, express (n + 1)! as n! * (n + 1) and apply the inductive hypothesis. By showing that n! * (n + 1) > 2^n * (n + 1) and confirming that n + 1 > 2, you can derive that (n + 1)! > 2^(n + 1). This method effectively demonstrates the inequality holds for all n >= 4.
joshanders_84
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
I'm to prove that for n>=4, 2^n < n! holds, but I don't know where to go after the inductive hypothesis that it holds for n>= 4 after showing it works for the base case (n = 4). Here are my steps so far:

2^(n+1) < (n+1)!
2*(2^n) < (n+1)(n!)

but I dont' know where to now! help is much appreciated, thanks.
Josh
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Start with:
1. n \geq 4
2. n! &gt; 2^n
and try to get to
(n+1)! &gt; 2^{n+1}

It shoud be pretty straightforward.
 
I understand that I'm supposed to get there, but I don't see the *proper* first step to take, as the things I have tried haven't gotten me there.
 
Well, for induction, you usually end up proving the n=1 (or in this case n=4) case first. You've got that done.

Then you need to identify your indictive hypothesis:
e.g.
n!&gt;2^n
and
n &gt; 4

In class the proof might look something like this:
(n+1)!=n! (n+1)
from the inductive hypothesis we have
n! (n+1) &gt; 2^n (n+1)
since n&gt;1 we have
2^n(n+1) &gt; 2^n(2)
and
2^n(2) = 2^{n+1}
Now, we can string it all togther to get the inequality:
(n+1)!=n! (n+1) &gt; 2^n(n+1) &gt; 2^n(2) =2^{n+1}
(n+1)! &gt; 2^{n+1}

In general, it's worth trying to figure out wether it 'safe'
to multiply
n!&gt;2^n
by
n+1 &gt; 2
while preserving the inequality.
Which is really what I wanted to do in my head. As soon as you are sure it is legitemate, you're done.
 
I saw a great walkthrough of this proof on inductiveproofs.com. It's an e course about how to write inductive proofs. Very helpful!
 
Hello, I'm joining this forum to ask two questions which have nagged me for some time. They both are presumed obvious, yet don't make sense to me. Nobody will explain their positions, which is...uh...aka science. I also have a thread for the other question. But this one involves probability, known as the Monty Hall Problem. Please see any number of YouTube videos on this for an explanation, I'll leave it to them to explain it. I question the predicate of all those who answer this...