How to Prove 2^n > n^2 for n>4 without using induction?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ngkamsengpeter
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the inequality 2^n > n^2 for n > 4 without using mathematical induction. Participants are exploring the nature of exponential and polynomial functions in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants suggest examining the growth rates of the functions involved, noting that exponential functions typically grow faster than polynomial functions. Others raise concerns about the validity of this reasoning without a formal proof, questioning the possibility of exceptions before infinity.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with various approaches being considered. Some participants have suggested using derivatives to analyze the behavior of the functions, while others are questioning the necessity and validity of using induction. There is a mix of perspectives on how to approach the proof without induction.

Contextual Notes

Participants are focused on proving the inequality specifically for integer values of n and are debating the implications of continuity and the behavior of the functions involved. There is an emphasis on finding a mathematical proof that does not rely on induction.

ngkamsengpeter
Messages
193
Reaction score
0
How to prove that [tex]2^n > n^2[/tex] when n>4 ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You could use the fact that both functions are continuous and never cross after that point. If you are only interested in integer n then you could use induction.
 
*Waves hand*
An exponential function grows faster than a polynomial.
 
That is not sufficient--it does not rule out the possibility of some point before infinity but after 4 where the inequality does not hold.

For integer n, induction is the way to go. Otherwise, you can show directly that the second derivative of 2^n is greater than that of n^2 for n > 4, and the first derivative of 2^n is greater than that of n^2 for n = 4. From this it is possible to infer the conclusion by integration.
 
0rthodontist said:
You could use the fact that both functions are continuous and never cross after that point. If you are only interested in integer n then you could use induction.
If I don't want to use induction but want to prove it mathematically ,how to do it ?
 
ngkamsengpeter said:
If I don't want to use induction but want to prove it mathematically ,how to do it ?
?
Huh?
What do you mean by mathematically? What's wrong with using induction, by the way? As a matter of fact, it's completely valid!
 
ngkamsengpeter said:
If I don't want to use induction but want to prove it mathematically ,how to do it ?
Induction would be simpler for this case if you want to prove it for integers. The other way I mentioned is using the function [tex]f(x) = 2^x - x^2[/tex]. You should be able to show that [tex]f'(4) > 0[/tex] and also that [tex]f''(x) > 0[/tex] for any x larger than 4. And you know that f(4) = 0. Then use
[tex]\int_a^t g'(x) dx + g(a) = g(t)[/tex]
to show that [tex]f'(x) > 0[/tex] for x > 4 and then that [tex]f(x) > 0[/tex] for x > 4.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K