Induction problem: Tk+1 = Tk + Tk-1 + Tk-2

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

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a recurrence relation defined as Tk+1 = Tk + Tk-1 + Tk-2, with participants exploring the properties of the sequence generated by this relation. The subject area includes mathematical induction and sequence analysis.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the inductive proof structure, questioning the validity of steps and assumptions made in the process. There are attempts to clarify the inductive step and the base case, with some participants expressing confusion over the logical flow of the proof.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing guidance on the inductive step and the need for clarity in mathematical reasoning. Some participants express uncertainty about how to proceed with their proofs, while others emphasize the importance of correctly framing assumptions.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of confusion regarding the initial assumptions and the implications of the inductive hypothesis. Participants are also grappling with the subtleties of mathematical induction and the flow of logic necessary for a coherent proof.

Calley
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
Induktion problem seeming problematic
Relevant Equations
It says that we have sequence starting with T1, T2,T3...
and that Tk+1 = Tk + Tk-1 + Tk-2. it also says that T1=T2=T3=1. Then states that Tk<=2^k,
for all K= 1, 2 ,3....
I have come to the conclusion that the sequence is 1 1 1 3 5 9...

trying to do induktion and I get Tp+1=2^p+1, which means that 2^p +2p-1 + 2p-2 <=2^p+1 and this is not really solvable in any satisfactory way. What am I doing wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not sure I understand where you are having the problem. Can you post what you are trying to do for the inductive step?
 
Step one Base it works for k=4.

Step two: If it works for k=4 it works for k=p

Step three: if it works for k=p it also works for k+1 =p+1

so Tp+1 <=2^p+1 ==> Tp + Tp-1 +Tp-2 <=2^p+1
==> 2^p + 2^p-1 +2^p-2 <=2^p+1
 
Calley said:
Step two: If it works for k=4 it works for k=p
I don't understand this.

Calley said:
Step three: if it works for k=p it also works for k+1 =p+1
This is called the inductive step. Can you post your attempt at this step?

Although, it should be ##k = p +1##.
 
PeroK said:
I don't understand this.This is called the inductive step. Can you post your attempt at this step?
I fixed it a bit. pls check. it does state that Tk<=2^k not Tk<=2^k+1
 
Last edited:
Calley said:
I fixed it a bit. pls check. it does state that Tk<=2^k not Tk<=2^k+1
Sorry, I missed this post, as I didn't get an alert.

Calley said:
Step one Base it works for k=4.

Step two: If it works for k=4 it works for k=p

Step three: if it works for k=p it also works for k+1 =p+1

so Tp+1 <=2^p+1 ==> Tp + Tp-1 +Tp-2 <=2^p+1
==> 2^p + 2^p-1 +2^p-2 <=2^p+1
You shouldn't start with what you want to prove. A lot of students seem to make this mistake and have the implication the wrong way round. You want to prove that $$T_{p} \le 2^p \ \Rightarrow \ T_{p+1} \le 2^{p+1}$$The inductive step, therefore, starts by assuming ## T_{p} \le 2^p##.
 
PeroK said:
Sorry, I missed this post, as I didn't get an alert.You shouldn't start with what you want to prove. A lot of students seem to make this mistake and have the implication the wrong way round. You want to prove that $$T_{p} \le 2^p \ \Rightarrow \ T_{p+1} \le 2^{p+1}$$The inductive step, therefore, starts by assuming ## T_{p} \le 2^p##.
I have done that. Here is where I'm a bit lost. Not sure how to proceed.

Tp+Tp-1+Tp-2 =<2^p+1 ?
 
Calley said:
I have done that. Here is where I'm a bit lost. Not sure how to proceed.

Tp+Tp-1+Tp-2 =<2^p+1 ?
I didn't see you do it! After you write the hypothesis for the inductive step. Assume:
$$T_{p} \le 2^p$$The next step is generally to calculate ##T_{p+1}##. Therefore:
$$T_{p+1} = T_p + T_{p-1} + T_{p-2} \le \dots$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: docnet
PS In this case there is actually a subtlely in the use of induction that you need to be aware of.
 
  • #10
PeroK said:
PS In this case there is actually a subtlely in the use of induction that you need to be aware of.
Tp + Tp-1+Tp-2 <= 2^p+1
2^p + 2^p-1 + 2^p-2 <= 2^p+1

what I am getting is 3p-3<=p+1 and i can't draw any conclusion here.

or switch the 2^p+1 into other parts on the right hand?
 
  • #11
Calley said:
Tp + Tp-1+Tp-2 <= 2^p+1
2^p + 2^p-1 + 2^p-2 <= 2^p+1

what I am getting is 3p-3<=p+1 and i can't draw any conclusion here.
To be honest, I haven't see any coherent mathematics from you yet. The statements you are writing are disjointed from each other and don't follow explicitly from what was previously assumed. In particular, you still seem to be working from the assumption that what you are trying to prove is true.

Induction is pure mathematics and in order to do a proof by induction, you must learn to get the correct flow of mathematical logic. Many students struggle with this. The mistakes you are making are very common. There's nothing wrong with struggling, but to make progress you need to try to understand how I am tackling the problem.

To recap, what we have (this is the level of work that will be expected from you):

1) By inspection ##T_k < 2^k## for ##k = 1, 2, 3##.

2) Let ##p \ge 3##, and assume ##T_k \le 2^k## for ##k = 1, 2, \dots p##. Therefore:
$$T_{p+1} = T_p + T_{p-1} + T_{p-2} \le \dots$$
 
  • #12
A template for writing proof by induction from my professor's notes (it has been really helpful to me) :
Screen Shot 2021-11-16 at 10.25.34 AM.png


:)
 
Last edited:
  • #13
Calley said:
2^p + 2^p-1 + 2^p-2 <= 2^p+1

what I am getting is 3p-3<=p+1 and i can't draw any conclusion here.
We need to see your work, not just what you end up with. Frankly, I'm mystified how you ended up with ##3p-3 \le p+1##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
6K
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K