Induction and the Fibonacci Sequence

  • Thread starter Thread starter cragar
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Induction
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around using mathematical induction to prove properties of the Fibonacci sequence. Participants are exploring the application of induction in the context of both the recursive definition and an explicit formula for the Fibonacci numbers.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to clarify how to apply induction to the Fibonacci sequence, questioning whether to add terms or simply plug in values. Other participants discuss the differences between the Fibonacci sequence and other summation formulas, raising questions about the nature of the proof being sought.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants providing guidance on the application of induction and discussing the explicit formula for the Fibonacci sequence. There is a recognition of the complexities involved in using induction for this particular case, and multiple interpretations of the proof approach are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the differences between recursive and explicit formulations of the Fibonacci sequence, and there is uncertainty regarding the appropriate application of induction in this context.

cragar
Messages
2,546
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement


If i want to use induction to prove the Fibonacci sequence I first check that 0 satisfies both sides of the equation. then i assume its true for n=k then show that it for works for n=k+1

The Attempt at a Solution


But I am a little confused if i should add another term or just plug in k+1
so the Fibonacci sequence is F_{n}=F_{n-1}+F_{n-2}
so then should k+1 be F_{k+1}= F_{k}+F_{k-1}+F_{k-2}
or should it beF_{k+1}=F_{k}+F_{k-1}
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Of course, you 'plug in' k+1. You don't add another term. It's not exactly clear what you are trying to prove here.
 
ok for example if we have 1+2+3+4+...n= n(n+1)/2
ow we assume its true for n=k and then plug in k=k+1 but on the left side we add the k+1 term to to previous sequence but on the right we plug in k+1
so we get 1+2+3+4+...k+(k+1)=(k+1)(k+1+1)/2
but with the Fibonacci sequence It seems a little strange to me
do i just add the next term or plug k+1 into all the terms?
 
cragar said:
ok for example if we have 1+2+3+4+...n= n(n+1)/2
ow we assume its true for n=k and then plug in k=k+1 but on the left side we add the k+1 term to to previous sequence but on the right we plug in k+1
so we get 1+2+3+4+...k+(k+1)=(k+1)(k+1+1)/2
but with the Fibonacci sequence It seems a little strange to me
do i just add the next term or plug k+1 into all the terms?

This all depends on what you are trying to prove. In this example, the left side is a sum, so sure, to go to the n+1 case you need to add a term. The right side is the formula for the sum, so to go to the n+1 case you change n to n+1. What exactly are you trying to prove about the Fibonacci sequence??
 
ok so the Fibonacci sequence is
F_{n}= \frac{a^{n+1}-b^{n+1}}{w}
so F_n is the formula for the sequence and a,b,w are fixed numbers and n is any integer and I am trying to prove the sequence with induction only I am not sure where to put the n+1
 
cragar said:
ok so the Fibonacci sequence is
F_{n}= \frac{a^{n+1}-b^{n+1}}{w}
so F_n is the formula for the sequence and a,b,w are fixed numbers and n is any integer and I am trying to prove the sequence with induction only I am not sure where to put the n+1

Ok, so you are talking about an explicit formula for the Fibonacci sequence. You put x^(n+1) into the recurrence relation for the Fibonacci sequence. You'll get a quadatic formula for value of x which has two solutions, call them a and b. Find them. Then you know c*a^(n+1)+d*b^(n+1) also satisfies the recurrence relation for any c and d. Now use the initial conditions F_0=1 and F_1=1 to fix c and d. There's really no 'induction' in this derivation. I think it would be really awkward to try to show this by induction.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K