Proof by Induction: P(k) to P(k+1)

  • Thread starter Thread starter kathrynag
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Induction Proof
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the inequality (1+x)^{k} ≥ 1+kx using mathematical induction, specifically transitioning from P(k) to P(k+1). Participants are exploring the implications of this inequality and its validity under certain conditions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss how to utilize the established inequality (1+x)^{k} ≥ 1+kx to derive the next step for (1+x)^{k+1}. There is uncertainty about how to correctly expand and manipulate the expressions involved.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered insights into the implications of multiplying inequalities and the need to consider the sign of the terms involved. There is an ongoing exploration of the conditions under which the original inequality holds, particularly regarding the value of x.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the lack of restrictions on x, while others suggest that certain assumptions may need to be made, such as requiring 1+x > 0. There is a discussion about the implications of specific values of k and x on the validity of the inequality.

kathrynag
Messages
595
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



(1+x)^{k}\geq1+kx

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I want to show for P(k+1)
(1+x)^(k+1)\geq1+kx+x
(1+x)^k*(1+x)\geq1+kx+x
 
Physics news on Phys.org
kathrynag said:
(1+x)^k*(1+x)\geq1+kx+x

Use this:

(1+x)^{k}\geq1+kx
 
I don't really understand how I use that...
 
You want to use an inequality involving (1 + x)^k to derive an inequality involving (1+x)^k (1+x), which is a multiple of it.

An inequality still holds if you multiply both sides by a positive number. If you multiply both sides of an inequality by a negative number, then you have to flip the sign from \le to \ge or vice versa.
 
Ok, so:
(1+x)^k(1+x)>(1+kx)(1+x)
>(1+2kx+x)
 
Right idea, but there is an error in your expansion.

Does the question give any restrictions on x? Is what you wrote still true of 1 + x < 0?
 
No restrictions.
1+kx+x+kx^2
 
When k = 3 and x = -4,

(1 + x)^k = (-3)^3 = -27 &lt; -11 = 1 - 12 = 1 + kx

which makes the statement false.
 
So, we have to assume 1+x>0
 
  • #10
so, x>-1
 
  • #11
kathrynag said:
So, we have to assume 1+x>0
I believe x has to be strictly within 1 unit of 1; i.e., |1 + x| < 1, which means that 0 < x < 2.
 
  • #12
kathrynag said:
No restrictions.
1+kx+x+kx^2

Once I get here I'm unsure where to go
 
  • #13
kathrynag said:
Once I get here I'm unsure where to go

Look at your first post; you need to show that that is \ge 1 + kx + x.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
818
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K