Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

An interesting inequality-question on the proof

  1. Sep 4, 2008 #1
    An interesting inequality--question on the proof...

    I am working on the following proof and have gotten about half way;

    If [tex]a_1, a_2, \ldots , a_n[/tex] are positive real numbers then

    [tex] \sqrt[n]{a_1 \cdots a_n} \leq \frac{a_1+a_2+\ldots +a_n}{n}[/tex]

    By induction, I started by showing it for n=2, which goes as follows.

    We must show that [tex]\sqrt{a_1 a_2} \leq \frac{a_1+a_2}{2}[/tex]. So consider some s, a positive real number. If

    [tex]\sqrt{a_1 a_2} \leq s \Rightarrow \sqrt{a_1 a_2} \leq \frac{\sqrt{a_1a_2}+s}{2} \leq s[/tex]

    And since [tex]\sqrt{a_1a_2}<a_1+a_2-\sqrt{a_1a_2}[/tex], just let that equal s. Then it follows that,

    [tex]\sqrt{a_1a_2} \leq \frac{\sqrt{a_1a_2}+a_1+a_2-\sqrt{a_1a_2}}{2}[/tex]

    Where after simplification we have shown that [tex]\sqrt{a_1 a_2} \leq \frac{a_1+a_2}{2}[/tex] or in other words it is true for n=2.

    Now for the next part of the proof, I think we must show that if it is true for [tex]n=2^m[/tex] then it is also true for [tex]n=2^{m+1}[/tex]. And then we must also show it if [tex]2^m < n < 2^{m+1}[/tex], but this is where I am stumped. Sorry for the choppiness in my explanation. Thanks for any assistance, I appreciate it.
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 4, 2008 #2
    Re: An interesting inequality--question on the proof...

    Eh, well the n = 2 case could be proved in an easier way just be multiplying both side by 2, squaring, rearranging, and factoring. It follows from the trivial inequality [tex]x^2 \geq 0[/tex]

    As for the induction, I'm not sure why you use n = 2^m since it works for any natural number n. Anyways AM-GM is not easy to prove by induction since you have to apply an algorithm that is also used in a proof without induction.
  4. Sep 5, 2008 #3


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Re: An interesting inequality--question on the proof...

    Actually, one of the classical proofs of the AM-GM inequality is an inductive one. The proof is due to Cauchy, and it follows the main ideas in the OP, i.e. inducting on powers of 2.

    There was a thread on this sometime back, here is the link. Check it out and post back if you need further help.
  5. Sep 5, 2008 #4
    Re: An interesting inequality--question on the proof...

    Oh alright, I didn't realize this was such a famous proof (Cauchy). Thanks for alerting me to that reference.
  6. Sep 6, 2008 #5
    Re: An interesting inequality--question on the proof...

    It can also be derived from the inequality

    [tex]\exp(x)\geq 1+x[/tex] (1)

    This is trivial to prove. It follows from this that:

    [tex]\left\langle\exp(X)\right\rangle = \exp\left(\left\langle X\right \rangle\right)\left\langle\exp\left(X - \left\langle X\right \rangle\right)\right\rangle[/tex]

    Apply (1) to the last factor:

    [tex]\left\langle\exp\left(X - \left\langle X\right \rangle\right)\right\rangle\geq \left\langle 1 + X - \left\langle X\right \rangle\right\rangle = 1[/tex]

    So, we have:

    [tex]\left\langle\exp(X)\right\rangle \geq \exp\left(\left\langle X\right \rangle\right)[/tex] (2)

    This is a special case of the convex inequality and the AM-GM inequality is a straightforward consequence of that inequality. But the convex inequality requires a bit more work to prove. The AM-GM inequality follows from (2) by taking X to be the logarithms of the a_i. The average on the l.h.s. is then the arithmetic mean, while on the r.h.s. you get the geometric mean.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook