Proof by Induction: Solve Complex Variables Problem 12

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tsunoyukami
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Induction Proof
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around using mathematical induction to prove a statement related to complex numbers, specifically the formula ##|z_1 z_2 ... z_n| = |z_1| |z_2| ... |z_n|## from Stephen D. Fisher's Complex Variables. Participants explore the principles of induction and how to apply them to this problem.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the initial steps of proving the statement for the base case and the inductive step. There are questions about the validity of moving from one step to another in the proof process, particularly regarding the transition from the case of k to k+1. Some suggest starting the induction with n=2 instead of n=1, while others emphasize the need to prove the case for two complex numbers first.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing hints and confirmations about the steps involved in the proof. There is recognition of the need to clarify certain assumptions and the importance of establishing the base case correctly. Some participants have offered guidance on how to approach the proof without reaching a consensus on all points.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the potential pitfalls in the inductive reasoning process and the necessity of proving the case for two complex numbers before extending to larger n. There is also mention of a common fallacy in induction that highlights the importance of careful argumentation.

Tsunoyukami
Messages
213
Reaction score
11
I'm having a little bit of difficulty with proofs by induction. I believe I understand the principles behind induction but find that I often get "stuck" in my proof - and I can "see" that its true but am not sure how to get that one step that will finish the proof.

When using mathematical induction to show that a statement is true we first show that it is true for the lowest value (usually 0 or 1) and then assume it holds true for some value k > 0 (or 1). Then we show that if the statement is true for the value (k+1) that it is true for all values, correct?So here is a question I must complete for homework from Stephen D. Fisher's Complex Variables, 2e:

"12. Let ##z_1, z_2, ..., z_n## be complex numbers. Establish the following formulas by mathematical induction:

a) ##|z_1 z_2 ... z_n| = |z_1| |z_2| ... |z_n|##" (Section 1.1, page 9).
Here is my attempt at a solution:First we show that this statement is true for n = 1 (which is obvious) - we find:

##|z_1| = |z_1|##

Next we assume that this statement holds true for some k > 1; that is that the following is true:

##|z_1 z_2 ... z_k| = |z_1| |z_2| ... |z_k|##

Lastly we must show that for some value, (k+1), the statement ##|z_1 z_2 ... z_n| = |z_1| |z_2| ... |z_n|## is true. So:

##|z_1 z_2 ... z_k z_{k+1}| = |z_1| |z_2| ... |z_k| |z_{k+1}| (1)##

To me this seems obvious is I can write:

##|z_1 z_2 ... z_k z_{k+1}| = |z_1 z_2 ... z_k| |z_{k+1}| (2)##
##|z_1 z_2 ... z_k| |z_{k+1}| = |z_1| |z_2| ... |z_k| |z_{k+1}| (3)##

By using the assumption that it holds true for k > 1. Is this a valid step to make? Can I go from (1) to (2), from which point (3) readily follows? Or am I missing something?

Any assistance is much appreciated; please provide me confirmation or a hint to lead me in the right direction - thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You need to prove that |z_1z_2| = |z_1||z_2| then apply the inductive hypothesis.
 
Tsunoyukami said:
I'm having a little bit of difficulty with proofs by induction. I believe I understand the principles behind induction but find that I often get "stuck" in my proof - and I can "see" that its true but am not sure how to get that one step that will finish the proof.

When using mathematical induction to show that a statement is true we first show that it is true for the lowest value (usually 0 or 1) and then assume it holds true for some value k > 0 (or 1). Then we show that if the statement is true for the value (k+1) that it is true for all values, correct?So here is a question I must complete for homework from Stephen D. Fisher's Complex Variables, 2e:

"12. Let ##z_1, z_2, ..., z_n## be complex numbers. Establish the following formulas by mathematical induction:

a) ##|z_1 z_2 ... z_n| = |z_1| |z_2| ... |z_n|##" (Section 1.1, page 9).
Here is my attempt at a solution:First we show that this statement is true for n = 1 (which is obvious) - we find:

##|z_1| = |z_1|##
You should start with n = 2. I will explain why below.
Next we assume that this statement holds true for some k > 2; that is that the following is true:

##|z_1 z_2 ... z_k| = |z_1| |z_2| ... |z_k|##

Lastly we must show that for some value, (k+1), the statement ##|z_1 z_2 ... z_n| = |z_1| |z_2| ... |z_n|## is true.

No, we don't show it is true for "some value". We show that if it is true for ##n=k## it is true the next value, which is ##k+1##
So:

##|z_1 z_2 ... z_k z_{k+1}| = |z_1| |z_2| ... |z_k| |z_{k+1}| (1)##

To me this seems obvious is I can write:

##|z_1 z_2 ... z_k z_{k+1}| = |z_1 z_2 ... z_k| |z_{k+1}| (2)##

That assumes you know it works for 2 complex numbers, which you haven't proven.

##|z_1 z_2 ... z_k| |z_{k+1}| = |z_1| |z_2| ... |z_k| |z_{k+1}| (3)##

By using the assumption that it holds true for k > 1. Is this a valid step to make? Can I go from (1) to (2), from which point (3) readily follows? Or am I missing something?

Any assistance is much appreciated; please provide me confirmation or a hint to lead me in the right direction - thanks!
That you can go from step 2 to step 3 is because your induction hypothesis is that it works for ##n=k##. But notice that this argument doesn't work for ##k=2##. That is why you need to start with ##k=2##.

There is a common example to illustrate the fallacy your argument falls into.

Theorem. If one man in a group of n men is a millionaire, they all are millionaires.

Proof: n=1 Obvious
Assume it is true for n = k, that is, if one man in a group of k men is a millionaire, they all are.

Now suppose you have a group of k+1 men, and one of them is a millionaire. Divide them into two groups, one containing k men and the other 1 man, with the millionaire in the larger group. By the induction hypothesis, 1 man in the group of k men is a millionaire so all k of that group are. Now take 1 of the millionaires out of the larger group and exchange him with the lone man. Now by the same argument, the man who was the lone man is also a millionaire, so everyone is.
 
Last edited:
Okay...so using ##z_1 = x_1 + iy_1## and ##z_2 = x_2 + iy_2##:

##|z_1 z_2| = |(x_1 + iy_1)(x_2 +iy_2)| = |(x_1 x_2 - y_1 y_2) + i(x_1 y_2 + x_2 y_1)|##

Now using definition of ##|z|## is such that ##|z| = |x + iy| = \sqrt{x^2 + y^2}## we find:

##|z_1 z_2| = |(x_1 x_2 - y_1 y_2) + i(x_1 y_2 + x_2 y_1)| = \sqrt{(x_1 x_2 - y_1 y_2)^2 + (x_1 y_2 + x_2 y_1)^2}##

Which, when simplified, yields:

##|z_1 z_2| = \sqrt{x_1 ^2 x_2 ^2 + x_1^2 y_2^2 + x_2^2 y_1^2 +y_1^2 y_2^2}##

Which can easily be shown to be equal to ##|z_1||z_2|##.


So now that I have shown that ##|z_1 z_2| = |z_1| |z_2|## I can assume that the given statement holds true for a specific value of n such that n = k and I can move from step (2) to step (3) because I have proven the statement for k =2, correct?
 
Tsunoyukami said:
Okay...so using ##z_1 = x_1 + iy_1## and ##z_2 = x_2 + iy_2##:

##|z_1 z_2| = |(x_1 + iy_1)(x_2 +iy_2)| = |(x_1 x_2 - y_1 y_2) + i(x_1 y_2 + x_2 y_1)|##

Now using definition of ##|z|## is such that ##|z| = |x + iy| = \sqrt{x^2 + y^2}## we find:

##|z_1 z_2| = |(x_1 x_2 - y_1 y_2) + i(x_1 y_2 + x_2 y_1)| = \sqrt{(x_1 x_2 - y_1 y_2)^2 + (x_1 y_2 + x_2 y_1)^2}##

Which, when simplified, yields:

##|z_1 z_2| = \sqrt{x_1 ^2 x_2 ^2 + x_1^2 y_2^2 + x_2^2 y_1^2 +y_1^2 y_2^2}##

Which can easily be shown to be equal to ##|z_1||z_2|##.


So now that I have shown that ##|z_1 z_2| = |z_1| |z_2|## I can assume that the given statement holds true for a specific value of n such that n = k and I can move from step (2) to step (3) because I have proven the statement for k =2, correct?

Yes.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K