Arithmetic-geometric mean inequality

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ed Quanta
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inequality Mean
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The arithmetic-geometric mean (AM-GM) inequality states that for non-negative real numbers a1, a2, ..., an, the inequality a1...an ≤ [(a1 + ... + an)/n]^n holds true. Various proofs exist for the AM-GM inequality, including those utilizing the rearrangement inequality, Chebyshev's inequality, and Jensen's inequality. Induction is also a viable method for proving AM-GM, particularly for cases involving 2^n terms, where the sum can be split into smaller sums. The discussion emphasizes the efficiency of using the rearrangement inequality for proof.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the arithmetic-geometric mean inequality
  • Familiarity with the rearrangement inequality
  • Knowledge of Chebyshev's inequality
  • Basic principles of mathematical induction
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the proof of the rearrangement inequality
  • Explore Chebyshev's inequality and its applications
  • Learn about Jensen's inequality and its proof techniques
  • Practice mathematical induction with various examples
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying inequalities, and anyone interested in advanced mathematical proofs will benefit from this discussion.

Ed Quanta
Messages
296
Reaction score
0
The arithmetic-geometric mean inequality is

a1...an<=[(a1+...+an)/n]^n where all of the a terms (a1,a2,etc) are non-negative real numbers. How do I go about proving this is true for 2^n terms? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are many proofs of AM-GM inequality,
the smallest one i know comes from rearrangement inequality.
(Rearrangement inequality itself is easily proved through induction).

if u wish u can try to prove AM - GM yourself using rearrangement inequality (its pretty easy) else post back and i will sketch a small proof of it.

Another way to prove is using chebyshev's inequality which again can be proved from rearrangement inequality.

Another simpler way of proving it is using jensen inequality but proving jensen inequality requires some handy work.

Ofcourse u can prove AM-GM ground up using induction but really this is the most tiring proofs of all.

-- AI
 
since it is specifically for the case of 2^r terms (you have n meaning two different things in the same sentence), then some kind of induction ought to work since you can split the sum of 2^r terms into two smaller sums of 2^{r-1} terms and use the am-gm formula by induction on everything in sight.
 
TenaliRaman said:
Ofcourse u can prove AM-GM ground up using induction but really this is the most tiring proofs of all.

I spent a little time trying this last night...I tired rapidly and quit.
 
this would prolly save ur time,
http://nrich.maths.org/askedNRICH/edited/2731.html

-- AI
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
628
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
774
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K