How are formulas with inductive proofs discovered?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Avichal
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formulas Proofs
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the discovery of mathematical formulas that are proven using inductive reasoning. Participants explore how such formulas can be conjectured or derived when the proofs themselves rely on induction, particularly focusing on examples like Euler's formula in graph theory.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how formulas can be discovered if they require inductive proofs, using Euler's formula as an example.
  • Another participant suggests that empirical observation can lead to the conjecture of formulas, citing the process of examining patterns in numerical data.
  • It is proposed that sometimes individuals may suspect a relationship or limit without fully understanding it, which can lead to the application of induction even in cases of incomplete understanding.
  • A later reply emphasizes the importance of examining the differences between successive values in inductive proofs as a method to gauge the validity of a conjecture.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various methods for discovering formulas, but there is no consensus on a singular approach. Multiple competing views on the process of conjecturing formulas remain present.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in understanding the relationship between empirical observation and formal proof methods are noted, as well as the potential for conjectures to arise from incomplete knowledge.

Avichal
Messages
294
Reaction score
0
There are certain formulas for which only inductive proofs are known. But since we need to know the formula first to prove it using mathematical induction, how do they get the formula in the first place?
Here is an example: - Euler's formula in graph theory states that v-e+f=2 for all planar graphs. I think only an inductive proof is currently known. So how did he come up with this formula without proving it first?...guessing?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Here is some interesting information (courtesy of micromass):-

www.homepages.math.uic.edu/~kauffman/DCalc.pdf

www.math.upenn.edu/~wilf/gfologyLinked2.pdf

I believe the topic of generatingfunctionology answers yours question, though I'm no expert.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There are different ways.
1. Try to find a formula empirically. For example, if you want to know a formula for the nth triangular number 1+2+3+...+n, you could compute the first 20 and try to find a relationship with n by examining the numbers. You can notice a lot of patterns just be examining data closely.

2. Sometimes you can know a lot about a problem without completely understanding it. In those cases you might have reason to believe something but not be able to prove it. For example, you might suspect that ln(n) - 1 -1/2 -1/3 - ... - 1/n approaches a limit without being able to prove it. Basically, even if you don't understand something very well, you can try to apply induction. You can "get lucky" with induction by proving something that you don't understand that well. The drawback is that such proofs don't always add much to your understanding or suggest new avenues to pursue.

I suspect that empirical observation is the main way that people conjecture formulas before they understand them.
 
Hey Avichal.

One should note the important step in an inductive proof which is the delta between successive values of n.

It obviously depends on the nature of the constraint (summation, multiplication, inequality, etc) but looking at the delta between steps is a good way to proving something or at least getting an idea of whether it potentially could be true (in the context of statements in induction proofs).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K