bchapa26 said:
I then assumed that the statement was true for all n that exist in the universe of natural numbers.
That's the statement you're trying to prove, so you can't assume it to be true.
The point of a proof by induction is that it allows us to prove infinitely many statements in a finite number of steps. The statements you need to prove are
n<2
n when n=0.
n<2
n when n=1.
n<2
n when n=2.
...
That's clearly an infinite number of statements. The idea is to break up the proof into two parts:
1. The 0th statement is true.
2. Let n be an arbitrary natural number.
If the nth statement is true, then the (n+1)th statement is true.
These two statements together imply that
all the statements you really want to prove are true. The 0th statement is just 0<1 and I'm pretty sure that this inequality is accepted as true without proof in the sort of course you're taking. So let's focus on part 2.
Let n be an arbitrary natural number. The nth statement is
n<2
n,
and the (n+1)th statement is
n+1<2
n+1.
You just need to show that the former implies the latter. So start by writing "n+1", and use the nth statement to see that n+1 < something. Then use other things you know to be true to show that the "something" is < 2
n+1.
bchapa26 said:
Am I allowed to manipulate the left hand side of the equation in any way as long as it remains greater than the right hand side?
Not sure if I understand the question. The axioms for the real numbers allow you to do certain things to an inequality, like add the same number to both sides. You are allowed to do precisely those things that the axioms say you can do. But in this case, I would just write down a string of inequalities and equalities that have n+1 on the far left and 2
n+1 on the far right.
n+1 < something < something else = 2
n+1