Proof By Induction (difficult problem)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dish
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Induction Proof
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around using mathematical induction to prove that for integers n ≥ 2, the expression (x+1)^n - nx - 1 is divisible by x^2. The initial steps include verifying the base case for n=2 and assuming the statement holds for n=k. The user expresses confusion while attempting to prove the case for n=k+1, particularly at a critical step involving factoring. A suggestion is made to factor out (x+1) and relate the remaining terms to the assumption made at the kth step, clarifying that m should be treated as a polynomial in x rather than a constant integer. The conversation concludes with the user expressing gratitude for the clarification.
Dish
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hey guys, I'm just totally stumped by this Q

Use mathematical induction to prove that for integer n, n > or = to 2,
(x+1)^n - nx - 1 is divisible by x^2.

It's not a Homework problem.

Attempt at solution:

1) Prove for n =2,
(x+1)^2 - 2x - 1 = x^2 + 2x +1 - 2x -1 = x^2
2) Assume true for n = k
thus (x+1)^k -kx -1 = m x^2 where m is any integer
3) Prove for n = k+1

(x+1)^(k+1) - (k+1)x - 1
(x+1)^k . (x+1) - kx - x - 1
(x+1)^k - kx -1 + x(x+1)^k - x - 1
m.x^2 + x(x+1)^k - x -1

from here on i am totally confused. :S
Please can someone help me to finish the proof, so that it's divisible by x^2?
Thank you :)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Dish said:
Hey guys, I'm just totally stumped by this Q

Use mathematical induction to prove that for integer n, n > or = to 2,
(x+1)^n - nx - 1 is divisible by x^2.

It's not a Homework problem.

Attempt at solution:

1) Prove for n =2,
(x+1)^2 - 2x - 1 = x^2 + 2x +1 - 2x -1 = x^2
2) Assume true for n = k
thus (x+1)^k -kx -1 = m x^2 where m is any integer
3) Prove for n = k+1

(x+1)^(k+1) - (k+1)x - 1
(x+1)^k . (x+1) - kx - x - 1
(x+1)^k - kx -1 + x(x+1)^k - x - 1
m.x^2 + x(x+1)^k - x -1

At the bold line, you can factor out (x+1) from some of the terms so that you have (x+1)(\mbox{something})+(\mbox{something else}). Look at the "something" carefully & think how you can relate it to your kth step. Plugging that relation in for the "something", you should be able to then expand things and get the result of x^2*(stuff).

By the way, your assumption that at the kth step (x+1)^k -kx - 1 = mx^2, where m is an integer, is incorrect. m can be a polynomial in x.
 
argh Thanks I get it now, thanks for the help
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Back
Top