A funny proof, but what is wrong with it?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jobsism
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Funny Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a proposed proof that claims to establish the inequality \([(n+1)/2]^n \geq n!\) for all positive integers \(n\). Participants analyze the validity of the proof and identify logical errors within it.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants point out a logical mistake in the proof related to the negation of universal statements, suggesting that proving the inequality for a specific case (e.g., \(n=2\)) does not suffice to disprove the general case.
  • Others argue that the counterexample provided does not address the possibility that the inequality may fail for other values of \(n\), thus failing to invalidate the original assumption comprehensively.
  • A participant expresses understanding after receiving clarification from others, indicating that the discussion has helped clarify the logical structure of the proof.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the proof contains logical flaws, particularly regarding the treatment of universal and existential quantifiers. However, there is no consensus on the implications of these flaws for the overall validity of the inequality.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the importance of rigor in mathematical proofs, especially concerning the assumptions made and the scope of counterexamples. Specific values of \(n\) are discussed, but the general case remains unresolved.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in mathematical logic, proof techniques, and the nuances of inequalities in number theory.

jobsism
Messages
115
Reaction score
0
Here's a question:-

Prove that for all positive integers n,

[(n+1)/2]^n >= n!

And here's a funny proof for it:-

Assume to the contrary that, for all positive integers n,

[(n+1)/2]^n < n!

However, for n=2,

(3/2)^2 > 2!

Therefore, our assumption must be false.

And hence, for all positive integers n, [(n+1)/2]^n >= n!

Now, I know that this proof can't be correct, because I've seen the real proof, and it's a marvel, making use of algebraic inequalities, and the proof above simply seems too simple compared to it. But I wonder, what's the mistake with the above proof?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You've made a logic mistake.

Consider the sentence

"All men are mortal"

This is true. But what's the negation of this sentence?? Is it

"All men are immortal"?

or is it

"There is a man that is immortal"??

It's the second one.

So, if your assertion is

"For all natural numbers n holds the inequality blabla"

then the negation of that is

"There is a natural number n such that the inequality does not hold"

Your proof shows that the inequality holds for n=2. But this does not contradict the negation, as there could still be an n such that it doesn't hold.
 
The assumption that for all possible integers n, n!>[(n+1)/2]^n is violated by your counter example, so that demonstrates that your assumption is false. You have not checked all possible values of n so it says nothing about any of those values. Your assumption being false says nothing about the case of only some n's satisfying the inequality.
 
Oh...now I understand. Thanks, micromass and bmxicle! :D
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
9K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
299
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K