Proof by induction for inequalities

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves proving that a sequence defined recursively, with initial condition X1=3, satisfies the inequality Xn-1 > 0 for all natural numbers n. The context is within the subject area of mathematical induction and inequalities.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the validity of the base case for n=1 and n=2, and the inductive step involving showing that Xk+1 > 1 based on the assumption that Xk > 1. There is mention of manipulating the recursive formula to facilitate the proof.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on how to approach the inductive step, suggesting algebraic manipulations to demonstrate the inequality. There is an acknowledgment of the simplicity of the solution, indicating a productive direction in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about handling inequalities in induction proofs and the initial conditions of the sequence are noted as critical to the discussion.

Easty
Messages
19
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A sequence (Xn) is defined by X1=3 and Xn+1= (6Xn+1)/(2Xn+5) for all n[tex]\in[/tex] N.

Prove by induction or otherwise that Xn-1 > 0 for all n [tex]\in[/tex] N.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I'm not sure with what to do when dealing with inequalities in an induction proof. Initial i tried subing in the recursion formula when attempting the inductive step but i don't think it gets me anywhere. I'd really appreciate any guidance on where to start.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The proposition is clearly true for n = 1 and n = 2, so suppose it's true for n = k. I.e., that xk > 1.

For the induction step, you have to show that xk + 1 > 1.

xk + 1 = (6xk + 1)/(2xk + 5)

Carry out the division to get something that you can show is greater than 1. Is that enough of a start?
 
It is easier if you write it as x_n > 1 instead of x_n - 1 >0.

Suppose x_n > 1 [Show that x_(n+1) > 1]

Mult both sides by 4.
Add 2x to both sides.
Add 1 to both sides.
Divide both sides by the right side quantity (which is > 0, why?)

And you should see x_(n+1) > 1.
 
Thanks a lot for the help. Its such a simple solution, no wonder i didnt get it
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K