Prove 2^n > 1/2(n+1)² is true help

  • Thread starter L²Cc
  • Start date
In summary: I didn't. k^2+2k+2 > \frac{k^2}{2}+2k+2. If you have a relation b1 > b2, then the relation a > b1 implies a > b2, too.
  • #1
L²Cc
149
0
i have understood step one (the easiest, hehehe)
If n=4, then LHS (left hand side) = 16
RHS (right hand side) = 12.5
16>12.5
Hence P4 is true...
but then when it comes to step 2, I am confused, I am used to proving sequences by mathematical induction, and, here, there doesn't seem to be a sequence in the first place...!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
L²Cc said:
i have understood step one (the easiest, hehehe)
If n=4, then LHS (left hand side) = 16
RHS (right hand side) = 12.5
16>12.5
Hence P4 is true...
but then when it comes to step 2, I am confused, I am used to proving sequences by mathematical induction, and, here, there doesn't seem to be a sequence in the first place...!

[tex]2^n > \frac{1}{2}(n+1)^2[/tex]

For n = 1, you have 2 > 2. :smile:
 
  • #3
radou said:
[tex]2^n > \frac{1}{2}(n+1)^2[/tex]

For n = 1, you have 2 > 2. :smile:

Sorry, n>3
 
  • #4
L²Cc said:
Sorry, n>3

Ok, not sure about this one, but, as you already showed, it is true for n = 4. Further on, we assume it is true for some k:
[tex]2^k > \frac{1}{2}(k+1)^2[/tex] ...(1)

We have to proove that it is true for k + 1:
[tex]2^{k+1} > \frac{1}{2}(k+2)^2 = \frac{k^2}{2}+ 2k + 2[/tex]

So, we can multiply both sides of (1) with 2 to obtain:
[tex]2^k \cdot 2 > \frac{1}{2}(k+1)^2\cdot 2 \Rightarrow[/tex]
[tex]2^{k+1} > (k+1)^2 = k^2+2k+2[/tex], which implies
[tex]2^{k+1}>\frac{k^2}{2}+ 2k + 2[/tex].
 
  • #5
hmm, why are you multiplying both sides by two?
 
  • #6
L²Cc said:
hmm, why are you multiplying both sides by two?

To obtain [tex]2^{k+1}[/tex] on the left side. Anyway, as I said, I'm not a hundred percent sure about this one, so maybe better wait for someone else to comment. :biggrin:
 
  • #7
hmm...if you add 2 on one side, you have to add it on the other...all right ill wait, although i don't think anyone will comment, I've been posting mathematical induction questions, and it's quite rare when people do actually answer...
 
  • #8
L²Cc said:
hmm...if you add 2 on one side, you have to add it on the other...all right ill wait, although i don't think anyone will comment, I've been posting mathematical induction questions, and it's quite rare when people do actually answer...

What do you mean by 'add 2 on one side'? Each side was multiplied with 2.
 
  • #9
sorry i meant multiply!
when we let k=k+1, isn't that only applicable for a sequence, here we're dealing with something completely different, there's no sequence...we just have to prove it...im really confused!
 
Last edited:
  • #10
L²Cc said:
sorry i meant multiply!
when we let k=k+1, isn't that only applicable for a sequence, here we're dealing with something completely different, there's no sequence...we just have to prove it...im really confused!

Well, you shouldn't think of any sequences. It's the principle of mathematical induction. We assumed that the statement was true for some natural number k, and we prooved that it is true for k+1. Therefore, we conclude that the statement is true for every natural number n > 3.
 
  • #11
ok i see what you are coming at, but i don't know whether the multiplication part is correct, although at the end Pn happens to be true (if we are to use your method: 2^k+1>1/2([k+1]+1)). Usually, in mathematical induction, you add 2^k+1 to the RHS because you are proving that the sum is applicable for the k+1th term...multiplying two to either sides does not seem logical? (that's only my point of view).
 
  • #12
L²Cc said:
... Usually, in mathematical induction, you add 2^k+1 to the RHS because you are proving that the sum is applicable for the k+1th term...multiplying two to either sides does not seem logical? (that's only my point of view).

There is no 'logic' in that sense here. You're talking about forms of induction proofs which apply for sequences, sums, etc. Maybe you need more examples - for instance, look at example 3 in this link: http://library.thinkquest.org/10030/11matind.htm".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #13
yeah that's helpful although they go into too much detail! your's makes sense, thanks radou! take care.
 
  • #14
radou said:
We have to proove that it is true for k + 1:
[tex]2^{k+1} > \frac{1}{2}(k+2)^2 = \frac{k^2}{2}+ 2k + 2[/tex]

So, we can multiply both sides of (1) with 2 to obtain:
[tex]2^k \cdot 2 > \frac{1}{2}(k+1)^2\cdot 2 \Rightarrow[/tex]
[tex]2^{k+1} > (k+1)^2 = k^2+2k+2[/tex], which implies
[tex]2^{k+1}>\frac{k^2}{2}+ 2k + 2[/tex].
how does 2^{k+1} > (k+1)^2 = k^2+2k+2 imply this 2^{k+1}>\frac{k^2}{2}+ 2k + 2 ? I think you skipped a step?
 
  • #15
L²Cc said:
how does 2^{k+1} > (k+1)^2 = k^2+2k+2 imply this 2^{k+1}>\frac{k^2}{2}+ 2k + 2 ? I think you skipped a step?

I didn't. [tex]k^2+2k+2 > \frac{k^2}{2}+2k+2[/tex]. If you have a relation b1 > b2, then the relation a > b1 implies a > b2, too.
 
  • #16
all right, sorry for the late reply. once again, thank you radou!
 

1. How do you prove 2^n > 1/2(n+1)²?

The proof for this inequality involves using mathematical induction, which is a method of proving that a statement is true for all natural numbers. This requires establishing a base case, assuming the statement holds for some arbitrary value, and then proving that it also holds for the next value in the sequence.

2. What is the base case for the proof?

The base case for this proof is n = 1. This means that we need to show that 2^1 > 1/2(1+1)², which simplifies to 2 > 1.

3. How do you show that the statement holds for the next value in the sequence?

To show that the statement holds for the next value in the sequence, n+1, we need to use the assumption that it holds for n. This means that we can write 2^n > 1/2(n+1)² as a starting point, and then use algebraic manipulation to prove that 2^(n+1) > 1/2((n+1)+1)². This will complete the inductive step and prove that the statement holds for all natural numbers.

4. Can you provide a visual representation of the proof?

Yes, a visual representation of the proof can be seen in a graph of the two functions, 2^n and 1/2(n+1)². The graph will show that the function 2^n is always greater than the function 1/2(n+1)² for all values of n.

5. Why is this proof important?

This proof is important because it shows the relationship between exponential and quadratic functions, and it can be applied to many real-world situations. It also demonstrates the power of mathematical induction as a method of proving statements for all natural numbers.

Similar threads

  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
569
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
962
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
781
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
774
Back
Top