Prove 2^n < (n+2)!; \forall n \ge 0 by Induction

  • Thread starter Thread starter jonroberts74
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves proving the inequality \(2^n < (n+2)!\) for all \(n \ge 0\) using mathematical induction. The discussion centers around the steps of the induction process and the necessary conditions for the inequality to hold.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the base case and the induction step, particularly how to manipulate the inequality for \(2^{k+1}\) and relate it to \((k+3)!\). There are questions about proving the inequality \(2 < k+3\) and how to establish this within the context of the induction hypothesis.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active with participants providing insights on how to approach the proof. Some participants suggest using the induction hypothesis effectively, while others emphasize the need to justify the inequality \(2 < k+3\) based on the assumptions of \(k\). There is no explicit consensus yet on the final steps of the proof.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the proof relies on the assumption that \(k\) is a non-negative integer, which is central to establishing the validity of the inequalities discussed.

jonroberts74
Messages
189
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement

prove by induction

[tex]2^n < (n+2)!; \forall n \ge 0[/tex]

P(0)

[tex]2^0 < (0+2)![/tex] [easy]

P(k)

[tex]2^k<(k+2)![/tex]
[tex]= 2^k < (k+2)(k+1)k![/tex]

P(k+1)

[tex]2^{k+1} < (k+1+2)![/tex]
[tex]= 2^k \cdot 2 < (k+3)(k+2)(k+1)k![/tex]

its pretty clear that

[tex]2 < k+3[/tex]

how do I show that though
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
jonroberts74 said:
its pretty clear that

[tex]2 < k+3[/tex]

how do I show that though

I would personally just say it's obvious. But if you want, you can prove it by induction. It all depends on how you defined ##<## and what your axioms are.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
I see you recognize that you cannot just write "[itex]2^{k+1}<((k+1)+ 2)![/itex]" since that is what you want to find- you wrote it only to remind yourself what you want to arrive at.

Your "induction hypothesis" is that [itex]2^k< (k+ 2)![/itex]. Now write [itex]2^{k+1}= 2(2^k)< 2(k+2)![/itex].

Now, use your "2< k+ 3" to get [itex]2^{k+1}< 2(k+2)!< (k+2)!(k+ 3)= (k+3)!= (k+1+2)![/itex].

To prove that 2< k+ 3, start from the fact that, since [itex]0\le k[/itex], [itex]-1< k[/itex] and add 3 to both sides.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
HallsofIvy said:
I see you recognize that you cannot just write "[itex]2^{k+1}<((k+1)+ 2)![/itex]" since that is what you want to find- you wrote it only to remind yourself what you want to arrive at.

Your "induction hypothesis" is that [itex]2^k< (k+ 2)![/itex]. Now write [itex]2^{k+1}= 2(2^k)< 2(k+2)![/itex].

Now, use your "2< k+ 3" to get [tex]2^{k+1}< 2(k+2)!< (k+2)!(k+ 3)= (k+3)!= (k+1+2)![/tex].

To prove that 2< k+ 3, start from the fact that, since [itex]0\le k[/itex], [itex]-1< k[/itex] and add 3 to both sides.


I am taking this

[itex]2^{k+1}= 2(2^k)< 2(k+2)![/itex]

by hypothesis, adding the multiple 2 to each side doesn't change the inequality

then prove 2<k+3

and do this from the fact

[tex]0 \le k[/tex] so -1<k ---> -1+3<k+3 = 2< K+3

then I can say [itex]2(2^k)< 2(k+2)! < (k+2)!(k+3)[/itex].
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K