How to Complete the Inductive Step in a Series Inequality Proof?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sbc824
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on completing the inductive step of a proof for the inequality involving the series sum of reciprocals of squares. The user has established the base case and the assumption but is unsure how to proceed with the inductive step. They need to show that if the inequality holds for k, it also holds for k+1. A key suggestion is to manipulate the inequality by adding the term 1/(k+1)² and simplifying to demonstrate that the left side remains less than or equal to the right side. Successfully proving this will complete the inductive proof.
sbc824
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



i=1 Sigma n (1/i2) <= 2 - (1/n)


The Attempt at a Solution



I've done the basic step and assumption step...little stuck on the inductive step

So far I have...

show 1 + 1/4 + 1/9 + 1/16 +...+ (1/k2) + (1/(k+1)2) <= 2 - (1/k+1)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
sbc824 said:

Homework Statement



i=1 Sigma n (1/i2) <= 2 - (1/n)

The Attempt at a Solution



I've done the basic step and assumption step...little stuck on the inductive step

So far I have...

show 1 + 1/4 + 1/9 + 1/16 +...+ (1/k2) + (1/(k+1)2) <= 2 - (1/k+1)
To clarify matters:

I take it that you need to prove (by induction) that:
\displaystyle <br /> \sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{1}{i^2}\le2-\frac{1}{n}\ .​

Is that correct?

So, you have assumed that 1 + 1/4 + 1/9 + 1/16 +...+ (1/k2) ≤ 2 - (1/k) ,

and you need to show that 1 + 1/4 + 1/9 + 1/16 +...+ (1/k2) + (1/(k+1)2) ≤ 2 - (1/(k+1)) .

Is that correct?

What have you tried, in this effort?

BTW: Please learn to use parentheses, so that your mathematical expressions say what you mean for them to say.
 
SammyS said:
To clarify matters:

I take it that you need to prove (by induction) that:
\displaystyle <br /> \sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{1}{i^2}\le2-\frac{1}{n}\ .​

Is that correct?

So, you have assumed that 1 + 1/4 + 1/9 + 1/16 +...+ (1/k2) ≤ 2 - (1/k) ,

and you need to show that 1 + 1/4 + 1/9 + 1/16 +...+ (1/k2) + (1/(k+1)2) ≤ 2 - (1/(k+1)) .

Is that correct?

What have you tried, in this effort?

BTW: Please learn to use parentheses, so that your mathematical expressions say what you mean for them to say.

Yes, that is correct...I've done equality inductive proofs, but have not encountered less than or greater than type proofs...so I'm not sure how to begin.
 
The idea is almost exactly the same as equality. Starting from where you left off you have \sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{1}{i^2} + \frac{1}{n+1}≤ 2- \frac{1}{n+1}
See what happens if you combine like terms and use what you already know about \sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{1}{i^2} to help you out.
 
sbc824 said:
Yes, that is correct...I've done equality inductive proofs, but have not encountered less than or greater than type proofs...so I'm not sure how to begin.
Let's see:

You are assuming that some k,
1 + 1/4 + 1/9 + 1/16 +...+ 1/k2 ≤ 2 - (1/k) .​

Adding 1/(k+1)2 to both sides gives you that
1 + 1/4 + 1/9 + 1/16 +...+ 1/k2 + 1/(k+1)2 ≤ 2 - (1/k) +1/(k+1)2 .​

So, if you can show that 2 - (1/k) +1/(k+1)2 ≤ 2 - 1/(k+1), then you should be able to complete the proof.
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K