Prove by mathematical induction Σ(1/[(2k-1)(2k+1)]=n/(2n+1)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the statement Σ(1/[(2k-1)(2k+1)]) = n/(2n+1) using mathematical induction. Participants emphasize the importance of showing work throughout the proof process, particularly verifying the base case and formulating the induction hypothesis. The base case is demonstrated for n=1, confirming the equality holds true. The next step involves adding a term to the left-hand side to extend the proof to n+1 and simplifying the right-hand side to match the required form. Completing this process will finalize the proof by induction.
simcan18
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
I'm in need of assistance for the following attachement.

View attachment 8456
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-10-05 at 9.11.34 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2018-10-05 at 9.11.34 AM.png
    4.1 KB · Views: 149
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I know this is a cliche, but you should really show your work (also in http://mathhelpboards.com/pre-calculus-21/prove-induction-25021.html), not just because it makes others happy, but mostly because it is not useful, nor fun, to be spoon-fed an induction proof.

You are probably aware of the general structure of this proof technique, but in what is perhaps its most elementary form it looks like this. You want to prove a statement for all $n \ge n_0$ where $n_0$ is an integer:

step 0. You verify the base case, i.e. you verify the statement holds for $n = n_0$. Often, but not always, $n_0 = 0$ or $n_0 = 1$.
step 1. You verify: If the statement holds for all $n = n_0,\ldots,m$ where $m \ge n_0$ is a certain integer, then the statement also holds for $n = m + 1$.

Step 0 cannot be omitted, although it is often tempting to do so.

Now, in these two threads, why don't you start by verifying step 0. If that checks out, then formulate the induction hypotheses. (This hypothesis is the part between if and then in step 1.) Finally, take all the time that is required to perform the induction step and do not give up on it too easily.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, but I'm unsure of how to get started with the problem as I don't understand which is the reason for no work being shown.
 
So, do I start like this
n=1
1 / (2x1-1) x(2x1+1) = 1/ 2(1) + 1 = 1/3, so both equations are true for n=1, as it is 1/3
 
Okay, once you've shown the base case is true, you want to decide what your inductive step is going to be, given the hypothesis \(P_n\):

$$\sum_{k=1}^n\left(\frac{1}{(2k-1)(2k+1)}\right)=\frac{n}{2n+1}$$

I see that in order for the sum on the LHS to go up to \(n+1\), we need to add:

$$\frac{1}{(2(n+1)-1)(2(n+1)+1)}=\frac{1}{(2n+1)(2n+3)}$$

And this gives us:

$$\sum_{k=1}^n\left(\frac{1}{(2k-1)(2k+1)}\right)+\frac{1}{(2(n+1)-1)(2(n+1)+1)}=\frac{n}{2n+1}+\frac{1}{(2n+1)(2n+3)}$$

Or:

$$\sum_{k=1}^{n+1}\left(\frac{1}{(2k-1)(2k+1)}\right)=\frac{n}{2n+1}+\frac{1}{(2n+1)(2n+3)}$$

Can you show that the RHS is:

$$\frac{n+1}{2(n+1)+1}$$ ?

If you can, then you will have derived \(P_{n+1}\) from \(P_n\) thereby completing the proof by induction. :)
 
Ok. I'll work on this some more to see if I can get it.

Thanks
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
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...
Back
Top