Can You Prove the Sum of Cubes Equals the Square of the Sum?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dleacock
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the identity that the sum of cubes from 1 to n equals the square of the sum of integers from 1 to n. The initial proof approach involves using the formula for the sum of the first n integers, S_n = n(n+1)/2, and squaring it. Participants suggest using mathematical induction, starting with the base case of n=1 and then assuming the statement holds for k to prove it for k+1. Concerns are raised about the validity of certain mathematical steps, particularly regarding square roots and algebraic manipulation. The conversation emphasizes the importance of clear proof structure and correct application of mathematical principles.
dleacock
hey everyone,
I recently bought the the Dover Series book on Number Theory, and the 2nd example on page 5 asks your to prove
1^3 + 2^3 + 3^3 ... + n^3 = (1 + 2 + 3...)^2

Now, we've already proved that S_n = \frac{n(n+1)}{2}

So here's how I proved it...
<br /> (S_n)^2 = (\frac{n(n+1)}{2})^2

before we proved how S_k+1 = S_k + (k + 1)

Which lead me to...
\frac{1}(k+1)^2((k+1)+1)^2{4} + (k+1)^2
= \sqrt{\frac{(k+1)^2((k+1)+1)^2}{4} + (k+1)^2}
= \frac{(k+1)((k+1)+1)}{2} + (k+1)
therefor...
S_k+1 = Sk + (k+1)


Now I'm worried that I didnt really solve anything. I'm totally knew at this, and I'm open to criticism and help, just be kind :)
(ps.. this is my first time posting formulas, hopefully I did it right)


Thanks
dleacock
 
Physics news on Phys.org
just a repost to clean up the math...\frac{1}{4}(k+1)^2((k+1)+1)^2 + (k+1)^2

= \sqrt{\frac{(k+1)^2((k+1)+1)^2}{4} + (k+1)^2}

= \frac{(k+1)((k+1)+1)}{2} + (k+1)
 
I don't own the book, but I looked at the pages on amazon, and it looks like you want to prove it using mathematical induction. This usually works in this way.

Proof:
Base Step (here, it will be n = 1)

Inductive Step Assume it is true for some k, and then show that it is true for k+1.
QED.Now you don't have to use induction, but it is what I think they want you to use. So first you should prove that the statement is true for n = 1, or k = 1. Meaning that if you plug 1 into the formula you will get the same thing, which is true.
1^3 = (1)^2
=&gt; 1 = 1

So then do the inductive hypothesis.

You would say that the statement is true for some k, then show that it is true for k + 1.

This would mean that you would want to show that:

1^3 + 2^3 + 3^3 ... + k^3 + (k+1)^3 = (1 + 2 + 3 + ... + k + (k+1) )^2
Using the fact that the statement is true for k.

Meaning, prove the previous statement with the fact that: 1^3 + 2^3 + 3^3 ... + k^3 = (1 + 2 + 3 + ... + k)^2

--------

dleacock said:
just a repost to clean up the math...\frac{1}{4}(k+1)^2((k+1)+1)^2 + (k+1)^2

= \sqrt{\frac{(k+1)^2((k+1)+1)^2}{4} + (k+1)^2}

= \frac{(k+1)((k+1)+1)}{2} + (k+1)

I am not sure what you were doing here. But you can't just take the square root of something out of nowhere, also \sqrt{ a^2 + b^2 } \neq a + b except in a few cases, so that is not allowed.
 
Last edited:
yeah, that's exactly what I thouhgt the problem was. I just squared it out of nowhere. oh well, back to work I go. thanks for the response and the tip!
 
mattmns said:
You would say that the statement is true for some k, then show that it is true for k + 1.

This would mean that you would want to show that:

1^3 + 2^3 + 3^3 ... + k^3 + (k+1)^3 = (1 + 2 + 3 + ... + k + (k+1) )^2
Using the fact that the statement is true for k.

Meaning, prove the previous statement with the fact that: 1^3 + 2^3 + 3^3 ... + k^3 = (1 + 2 + 3 + ... + k)^2

--------
In other words show, k^{2}(k+1)^{2} - k^{2}(k-1)^{2} = 4k^{3}
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K