Prove False: n\geq a\Rightarrow n!\geq a^n

  • Thread starter Thread starter 3.1415926535
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Induction
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the false statement that if n ≥ a, then n! ≥ a^n, which was initially attempted to be proven by induction. The base case for n=1 holds true, but the inductive step fails when tested with specific values, such as n=3 and a=2, leading to the contradiction 6 ≥ 8. The mistake identified is in the application of induction, where the hypothesis incorrectly generalizes n as all integers instead of treating it as a specific integer. It is clarified that a constant value for a is necessary for the induction to hold, as allowed values of a increase with n. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of correctly framing the hypothesis in mathematical induction.
3.1415926535
Messages
80
Reaction score
0
I will prove the false statement, that n\geq a\Rightarrow n!\geq a^n, n\in \mathbb{N}-\left \{ 0 \right \} with induction

For n=1 1\geq a\Rightarrow 1!\geq a^1\Rightarrow 1 \geq a which is true.

Suppose that n\geq a\Rightarrow n!\geq a^n, n\in \mathbb{N}-\left \{ 0 \right \}

Then,
n\geq a\Rightarrow (n+1)!\geq nn!\geq aa^n=a^{n+1} which yields that n+1\geq a\Rightarrow(n+1)!\geq a^{n+1}

Therefore, n\geq a\Rightarrow n!\geq a^n
But for n=3,a=2 using the inequality we just proved 3\geq 2\Rightarrow3!\geq 2^3\Leftrightarrow 6\geq 8 Impossible!. Where is my mistake?

[EDIT] Don't bother answering. I have highlighted the mistake I made that rendered the inequality invalid for a greater than 1
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org


3.1415926535 said:
Suppose that n\geq a\Rightarrow n!\geq a^n, n\in \mathbb{N}-\left \{ 0 \right \}

That's not the hypothesis used in induction.

Ordinary induction would use the hypothesis:
n!\geq a^n where we think of n as a particular integer, not as "all integers".

and you would have to prove (n+1)! \geq a^{n+1}

So-called "strong induction" would use the hypothesis:
For each integer i: 0 < i \leq n , i! \geq a^i

and you would still have to prove (n+1)! \geq a^{n+1}
 


Stephen Tashi said:
That's not the hypothesis used in induction.

Ordinary induction would use the hypothesis:
n!\geq a^n where we think of n as a particular integer, not as "all integers".

and you would have to prove (n+1)! \geq a^{n+1}

So-called "strong induction" would use the hypothesis:
For each integer i: 0 < i \leq n , i! \geq a^i

and you would still have to prove (n+1)! \geq a^{n+1}

I am sorry, I messed up with latex. That was not my hypothesis...
 


I was having trouble too. The world will probably end because of clerical errors.
 


The problem is that n+1 \geq a does not imply that n \geq a which you seem to have used.
 


The basic problem seems to be that allowed values of a increase with n, while induction would work only if a is constant.
 
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...
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