Prove Induction: (1+2+4+...+2^n)+1=2^(n+1)

  • Thread starter Thread starter John112
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Induction Proof
John112
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
To prove: (1 + 2 + 4 + . . . + 2^{n}) + 1 = 2^{n+1} , ∀n ≥ 0 .
Basis Step n = 0: LEFT HAND SIDE: (2^{0})+ 1 = 1 + 1 = 2 RIGHT HAND SIDE 2^{0} + 1 = 2
Inductive Step: Assume (1 + 2 + 4 + . . . + 2^{k}) + 1 = 2^{k+1}
Then (1 + 2 + 4 + . . . + 2^{k} + 2^{k+1}) + 1 = 2^{k+1} + 2^{k+1} + 1 = 2^{k+2} + 1.

Is this proof right? This is a proof given to one of the example problems in the book. To me it seems wrong. If it is right then can someone explain how the +1 came to be at the end ( 2^{k+2} + 1).

Isn't the above proof should be like this?

so (1 + 2 + 4 + . . . + 2^{k} + 2^{k+1}) + 1 = 2^{k+1} + 2^{k+1} = 2^{k+2}

Because (1 + 2 + 4 + . . . + 2^{k} + 2^{k+1}) + 1 can be rewritten as

[(1 + 2 + 4 + . . . + 2^{k}) + 1] + 2^{k+1} by commutative property of addition. From the inductive step we assumed that (1 + 2 + 4 + . . . + 2^{k}) + 1 = 2^{k+1}

[(1 + 2 + 4 + . . . + 2^{k}) + 1] + 2^{k+1} = 2^{k+1} + 2^{k+1} = 2^{k+2}
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
John112 said:
Isn't the above proof should be like this?
Indeed. The second version is good, the first has some wrong "+1".
 
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...
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top