MHB A proof about the fibonnaci numbers (simple for you guys)

  • Thread starter Thread starter E01
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Numbers Proof
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around proving the equation $$F_1*F_2+F_2*F_3+...+F_{2n-1}*F_{2n}=F^2_{2n}$$ using induction. It was clarified that the earlier proof regarding $$F_{2n}=F_1+F_2+...+F_{2n-1}$$ is not necessary for this proof, despite being incorrectly stated. The correct approach involves assuming the result holds for n and proving it for n + 1, leading to the equation $$F_1F_2 + F_2F_3 + \cdots + F_{2n-1}F_{2n} + F_{2n}F_{2n+1} + F_{2n+1}F_{2n+2} = F_{2n+2}^2$$. The participant realized that simply substituting n + 1 into the equation was not sufficient for proving the sum. Ultimately, the guidance provided helped resolve the initial confusion and led to solving additional problems.
E01
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
The problem is as stated:
Prove that $$F_1*F_2+F_2*F_3+...+F_{2n-1}*F_{2n}=F^2_{2n}$$

But earlier in my text I proved by induction that $$F_{2n}=F_1+F_2+...+F_{2n-1}$$. Do I need to use this earlier proof in my current proof. I tried adding $$F_{2n+1}F_{2n+2}$$ to the right and left hand side of the first equation and tried to find $$F_{2n+1}F_{2n+2}+F^2_{2n}=F^2_{2n+2}$$ but that doesn't seem to be going anywhere. (Why doesn't that seem to work in this case? Because I am multiplying two sums together?)

Am I wrong in assuming that I am supposed to prove this by induction?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Your equation $$F_{2n}=F_1+F_2+...+F_{2n-1}$$ must have a typo, because it's incorrect (try it for [math] n = 2[/math], say). However, I don't think you need it to solve the given problem. Proving by induction is correct, but your induction step isn't set up quite right. Assume the result is true for n and try to prove it for n + 1. Thus, we are trying to prove that

[math]F_1F_2 + F_2F_3 + \cdots + F_{2n-1}F_{2n} + F_{2n}F_{2n+1} + F_{2n+1}F_{2n+2} = F_{2n+2}^2[/math]

(because [math]2(n+1) = 2n +2[/math]), and we know by induction that

[math]F_1F_2 + F_2F_3 + \cdots + F_{2n-1}F_{2n} = F_{2n}^2[/math]

Can you take it from there?
 
Yea, after you told me how to set it up it took about ten seconds :P, and here I had sat and wondered about it for like an hour. I had assumed that I could plug N+1 into $$F_{2n-1}F_{2n}$$ and add that back to the left hand side of the equation and get what equaled $$F^2_{2n+2}$$. So now I know that adding the last term with n+1 substituted for n to the sum doesn't necessarily result in the actual n+1 sum as a whole. (Also thanks to you I solved the next three problems I couldn't solve :D)
 
Last edited:
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Back
Top