Inductive proof foundations of analysis

Someone else may be able to give a better explanation though, I am on the same level as you. In summary, the student used mathematical induction to prove the equation 4+1+4^-1+4^-2...4^-k = 16/3-1/(3)(4^k). The student confirmed the basis step and then proceeded by changing the variable to n and adding n+1. By multiplying and dividing the equation by appropriate terms, the student was able to prove the equality for k+1 and thus proving the overall equation.
  • #1
inovermyhed
1
0

Homework Statement


Prove the following. 4+1+4^-1+4^-2...4^-k = 16/3-1/(3)(4^k)


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I confirmed the basis step and proceeded by changing the variable to n and adding n+1. I now have (16/3) - (1/(3)(4^k)) + (1/4^k+1) = 16/3 - (1/(3)(4^k+1)). In trying to get these even I have tried simplifying (that made a mess), adding and subtracting by (3)(12k), multiplying and dividing by 4^k+1 and a combination of these tactics. I just need some direction on how to proceed or to know if I am going about this completely wrong. Thank you.

 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
inovermyhed said:

Homework Statement


Prove the following. 4+1+4^-1+4^-2...4^-k = 16/3-1/(3)(4^k)

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


I confirmed the basis step and proceeded by changing the variable to n and adding n+1. I now have (16/3) - (1/(3)(4^k)) + (1/4^k+1) = 16/3 - (1/(3)(4^k+1)). In trying to get these even I have tried simplifying (that made a mess), adding and subtracting by (3)(12k), multiplying and dividing by 4^k+1 and a combination of these tactics. I just need some direction on how to proceed or to know if I am going about this completely wrong. Thank you.
Hello inovermyhed. Welcome to PF !

Making your post easier to read, will likely get you more help, faster.

Your post would be much easier to read, if you would use appropriate spacing --- even better yet, in addition to that, use the X2 & X2 icons for super/sub scripts --- even better yet use LaTeX.

I.E.:
[ QUOTE ]

Homework Statement


Prove the following. 4+1+4-1+4-2...4-k = 16/3-1/(3)(4k)[ /QUOTE ]​
I suppose the (4k) should actually be in the denominator. ?
[ QUOTE ]

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution


I confirmed the basis step and proceeded by changing the variable to n and adding n+1.

I now have
(16/3) - (1/(3)(4k)) + (1/4k+1) = 16/3 - (1/(3)(4k+1)).​
In trying to get these even I have tried simplifying (that made a mess), adding and subtracting by (3)(12k), multiplying and dividing by 4^k+1 and a combination of these tactics. I just need some direction on how to proceed or to know if I am going about this completely wrong. Thank you.
[/QUOTE ]​

"QUOTE" tags intentionally deactivated so OP can see what's behind the spacing & formatting.
 
  • #3
This is coming from another Real Analysis student so I may be making a mistake, but the practice for me is definitely worth it so please point out if I did something wrong.
Taking k=1 we see that the equality holds, so we assume the equality holds for k and attempt to prove for k+1. We then have [itex] {\frac{16}{3}} - {\frac{1}{3 * 4^k}} + 4^{-k -1} = {\frac{16}{3}} - {\frac{1}{3 * 4^{k+1}}} [/itex]
Subtract 16/3 from both sides and multiply by negative 3 to get
[itex]{\frac{1}{{4^k}}} - 3 * 4^{-k -1} = {\frac{1}{4^{k+1}}} [/itex]
You can then multiply both sides by [itex] 4^{k+1} [/itex] to get
[itex] {\frac{4^{k+1}}{4^k}} - 3*4^{k+1} * 4^{-k -1} = 1 [/itex]
but the first term on the left just gives 4 and through a little manipulation i.e breaking [itex] 4^{k+1} [/itex] into [itex] 4^k *4 [/itex] and a similar maneuver with [itex] 4^{-k -1}[/itex] you get 4-3 = 1 thus proving the equality.
I think that is correct.
 

1. What is the purpose of using inductive proof in the foundations of analysis?

Inductive proof is used in the foundations of analysis to establish general rules or principles from specific cases or examples. It allows us to make conclusions about an entire set of numbers or objects based on observations of a few cases.

2. How does inductive proof differ from deductive proof?

Inductive proof uses specific examples to make a general conclusion, while deductive proof starts with a general statement and uses logical reasoning to make specific conclusions.

3. What is the role of mathematical induction in inductive proof?

Mathematical induction is a specific type of inductive proof that is commonly used in the foundations of analysis. It involves proving a statement for the first case, and then showing that if the statement holds for one case, it will hold for the next case as well.

4. Can inductive proof be used to prove all mathematical statements?

No, inductive proof is not a foolproof method of proving all mathematical statements. It can only be used to prove statements that can be generalized from specific cases, and it is important to carefully consider the validity of each step in the proof.

5. Are there any limitations to using inductive proof in the foundations of analysis?

One limitation of inductive proof is that it is based on observations and may not always accurately represent an entire set of numbers or objects. It also requires a strong understanding of mathematical concepts and logical reasoning to be used effectively.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
782
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
544
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
17
Views
794
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
723
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
803
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
806
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
13
Views
1K
Back
Top