Prove False: n\geq a\Rightarrow n!\geq a^n

  • Thread starter 3.1415926535
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Induction
In summary, the conversation discussed the use of induction to prove the statement n\geq a\Rightarrow n!\geq a^n, n\in \mathbb{N}-\left \{ 0 \right \} for a specific value of n. However, the incorrect use of the hypothesis led to an invalid inequality. It was also mentioned that the allowed values of a increase with n, which is not compatible with the use of induction.
  • #1
3.1415926535
80
0
I will prove the false statement, that [tex]n\geq a\Rightarrow n!\geq a^n, n\in \mathbb{N}-\left \{ 0 \right \}[/tex] with induction

For [tex]n=1[/tex] [tex]1\geq a\Rightarrow 1!\geq a^1\Rightarrow 1 \geq a[/tex] which is true.

Suppose that [tex]n\geq a\Rightarrow n!\geq a^n, n\in \mathbb{N}-\left \{ 0 \right \}[/tex]

Then,
[tex]n\geq a\Rightarrow (n+1)!\geq nn!\geq aa^n=a^{n+1}[/tex] which yields that [tex]n+1\geq a\Rightarrow(n+1)!\geq a^{n+1}[/tex]

Therefore, [tex]n\geq a\Rightarrow n!\geq a^n[/tex]
But for [tex]n=3,a=2[/tex] using the inequality we just proved [tex]3\geq 2\Rightarrow3!\geq 2^3\Leftrightarrow 6\geq 8[/tex] Impossible!. Where is my mistake?

[EDIT] Don't bother answering. I have highlighted the mistake I made that rendered the inequality invalid for a greater than 1
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2


3.1415926535 said:
Suppose that [tex]n\geq a\Rightarrow n!\geq a^n, n\in \mathbb{N}-\left \{ 0 \right \}[/tex]

That's not the hypothesis used in induction.

Ordinary induction would use the hypothesis:
[itex] n!\geq a^n [/itex] where we think of [itex] n [/itex] as a particular integer, not as "all integers".

and you would have to prove [itex] (n+1)! \geq a^{n+1} [/itex]

So-called "strong induction" would use the hypothesis:
For each integer [itex] i: 0 < i \leq n , i! \geq a^i [/itex]

and you would still have to prove [itex] (n+1)! \geq a^{n+1} [/itex]
 
  • #3


Stephen Tashi said:
That's not the hypothesis used in induction.

Ordinary induction would use the hypothesis:
[itex] n!\geq a^n [/itex] where we think of [itex] n [/itex] as a particular integer, not as "all integers".

and you would have to prove [itex] (n+1)! \geq a^{n+1} [/itex]

So-called "strong induction" would use the hypothesis:
For each integer [itex] i: 0 < i \leq n , i! \geq a^i [/itex]

and you would still have to prove [itex] (n+1)! \geq a^{n+1} [/itex]

I am sorry, I messed up with latex. That was not my hypothesis...
 
  • #4


I was having trouble too. The world will probably end because of clerical errors.
 
  • #5


The problem is that [itex]n+1 \geq a[/itex] does not imply that [itex]n \geq a[/itex] which you seem to have used.
 
  • #6


The basic problem seems to be that allowed values of a increase with n, while induction would work only if a is constant.
 

1. What does the statement "n\geq a\Rightarrow n!\geq a^n" mean?

The statement means that if n is greater than or equal to a, then n factorial (n!) is greater than or equal to a to the power of n.

2. How can you prove that the statement is false?

We can prove that the statement is false by providing a counterexample, where n is a value that satisfies the condition but the result is not true. For example, if n = 3 and a = 4, then n!\geq a^n becomes 6\geq 64, which is not true.

3. Can you explain why the statement is false?

The statement is false because the factorial function grows at a much faster rate than the exponential function. This means that for large enough values of n and a, n! will always be greater than a to the power of n, regardless of the initial condition.

4. Is there a specific range of values for n and a where the statement is true?

No, there is no specific range of values for n and a where the statement is true. As mentioned before, the factorial function grows at a much faster rate than the exponential function, so for any given value of a, there will always be a larger value of n that satisfies the condition but the result is not true.

5. How is the statement "n\geq a\Rightarrow n!\geq a^n" relevant in the field of science?

This statement may be relevant in certain mathematical or computational contexts, but it is not commonly used or studied in most scientific fields. In general, scientists focus on making observations and drawing conclusions based on evidence, rather than proving mathematical statements.

Similar threads

Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • General Math
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
841
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • General Math
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
682
Replies
0
Views
353
Back
Top