Mathematica Mathematical Induction Help: Proving 7a+3b>=12 for n>=12 using Induction

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on proving the statement that for all integers n ≥ 12, there exist non-negative integers a and b such that n = 7a + 3b using mathematical induction. Participants clarify that the proof requires establishing the base case for n = 12, where valid values for a and b can be found through trial and error. The proof then extends to show that if the statement holds for n, it also holds for n + 1, thereby confirming the induction hypothesis. The discussion emphasizes the necessity of proving both the base case and the inductive step to validate the statement for all integers greater than or equal to 12.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of mathematical induction principles
  • Familiarity with non-negative integers
  • Basic algebraic manipulation skills
  • Knowledge of the properties of integers
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of mathematical induction in detail
  • Practice proving statements using induction with various base cases
  • Explore the concept of non-negative integer combinations in number theory
  • Learn about the applications of induction in computer science and logic
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for students of mathematics, educators teaching induction, and anyone interested in number theory and proof techniques.

matrix_204
Messages
99
Reaction score
0
i was having trouble coming up with an induction proof for this problem, although i have tried and was able to prove it sumhow(using numbers 1 n so forth, teacher doesn't allow us to use them yet), but not using induction. I have no clue on how to do this using induction. please help me.

Problem: Prove that for all n>=12, there are non-negative integers a and b such that n=7a+3b.

THen note that if a,b are integers such that 7a+3b>=12, then a>=2 and b>=2.

Then put the above property so that having the expression n of the type (n=7a+3b) gives an expression for n+1 also for the type (n=7a+3b).

how am i suppose to start this proof, using induction and using facts if needed.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Assume it's true for n. Then for n+1

n+1 = 7a'+3b'

so that

n = 7a'+3b'-1 = 7a' + 3 b' + 6 - 7 = 7(a'-1) + 3(b'+2)

Just set a' - 1 = a and b' +2 = b and you have your proof.
 
aaaah, now i understand.. thanks a lot, i didn't bother going any further after writing n+1=7a+3b. i really really appreciate the help, thanks again
 
Isn't there a crucial step in induction missing? What happens when n= 12?
 
aren't we suppose to assume it is true for the first number, for example n=12, and then prove for the next number n+1.
 
Yes, it must first be proven that the statement is true for 12, then go on to show it is true for n+1
 
so how do we prove it for 12, if we don't know a and b?
 
matrix_204 said:
so how do we prove it for 12, if we don't know a and b?

firstly you said a => 2 and b => 2 for n => 12

7(2) + 3(2) = 14 + 6 = 20 => 12 and this is true for the first allowed case for 12 since 20 => 12, the last time i checked

thats your first step

then assume it for k and follow the steps given to you before me
 
Matrix, can you not find a, b by simple trial and error ? It hardly takes a couple of tries before you find the right values.

Stunner, you are not answering matrix's question about the initial case.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
matrix_204 said:
aren't we suppose to assume it is true for the first number, for example n=12, and then prove for the next number n+1.

It looks to me like you don't have a feel for the induction process yet.

Just to elaborate one what Spectre said, you have to prove that the statement P(n) is true for n=12. In fact, if you don't do that, you will only prove the conditional statement: If P(n) is true, then P(n+1) is true.

Well what if P(n) is not true?

That's why both steps are needed. When both P(12) and P(n)-->P(n+1) are proven, then the proof holds for all n>=12 by the domino effect.

P(12) is true. proven directly[/color]
P(12)-->P(13) because P(12)-->P(12+1), and P(12) is true[/color]
P(13)-->P(14) because P(13)-->P(13+1), and P(13) is true[/color]
.
.
.

and so on.
 
  • #11
If P(n) is not true, then P(n+1) is true. p(n)=>p(n+1) then P(n) must be true, according to the truth table
 
  • #12
matrix_204 said:
If P(n) is not true, then P(n+1) is true. p(n)=>p(n+1) then P(n) must be true, according to the truth table
beeeeeeeeeeeep ...
check the truth table again ...
given a statement p->q
if p is false and q is true, p->q is still true

so given the truth values of q and p->q , one cannot determine the truth value of p. If that were so , most of the modus ponen rules i study in AI would come to nought! really!

-- AI
P.S-> 7*0+3*4 = 12
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
8K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K