MHB Proving $2^{\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{3}+\dots+\frac{1}{n}}<n$ for All $n\ge 2$

  • Thread starter Thread starter anemone
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the inequality \(2^{\left(\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{3}+\dots+\frac{1}{n}\right)} < n\) for all integers \(n \ge 2\). It references the asymptotic behavior of the harmonic series, noting that the limit of the difference between the harmonic sum and the natural logarithm approaches Euler's constant, \(\gamma\). As \(n\) increases, the logarithmic transformation shows that the left side grows slower than the right side, confirming the inequality holds for sufficiently large \(n\). The proof relies on the properties of logarithms and the behavior of the harmonic series. The conclusion reinforces that the inequality is valid for all integers \(n\) starting from 2.
anemone
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
Messages
3,851
Reaction score
115
Prove that $2^{\left(\dfrac{1}{2}+\dfrac{1}{3}+\dfrac{1}{4}+\cdots+\dfrac{1}{n}\right)}_{\phantom{i}}<n$ for all integer $n\ge 2$.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
anemone said:
Prove that $2^{\left(\dfrac{1}{2}+\dfrac{1}{3}+\dfrac{1}{4}+\cdots+\dfrac{1}{n}\right)}_{\phantom{i}}<n$ for all integer $n\ge 2$.

[sp]Is...

$\displaystyle \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \sum_{k=1}^{n} \frac{1}{k} - \ln n = \gamma\ (1)$

... where $\gamma = .5772... $ is thye Euler's constant, so that...

$\displaystyle \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \sum_{k=2}^{n} \frac{1}{k} - \ln n = \gamma - 1 < 0\ (2)$

... and that means that for n 'large enough' ...

$\displaystyle \ln \{ 2^{(\frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{3} + ... + \frac{1}{n})} \} < \ln \{ e^{(\frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{3} + ... + \frac{1}{n})} \} < \ln n\ (3)$ [/sp]

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$
 
we have
$(\dfrac{k}{k-1})^k = (1 + \dfrac{1}{k-1})^k \ge 1 + k \dfrac{1}{k-1} \gt 2$
or $2^\dfrac{1}{k} < (\dfrac{k}{k-1})$
multiply n- 1 terms taking k from 2 to n we get the result
 
My solution:

We see that for the base case $n=2$, we have:

$$2^{\frac{1}{2}}<2$$

This is true, so we may state the induction hypothesis $P_k$:

$$2^{\sum\limits_{j=2}^k\left(\dfrac{1}{j}\right)}<k$$

If, as our induction step, we multiply $P_k$ by $$2^{\dfrac{1}{k+1}}$$, there results:

$$2^{\sum\limits_{j=2}^{k+1}\left(\dfrac{1}{j}\right)}<k\cdot2^{\dfrac{1}{k+1}}$$

Now, consider that:

$$0<\sum_{k=2}^{n+1}\left({n+1 \choose k}\frac{1}{n^k}\right)$$

Hence:

$$2<2+\frac{1}{n}+\sum_{k=2}^{n+1}\left({n+1 \choose k}\frac{1}{n^k}\right)=\sum_{k=0}^{n+1}\left({n+1 \choose k}\frac{1}{n^k}\right)=\left(1+\frac{1}{n}\right)^{n+1}$$

Thus, we must have:

$$2^{\dfrac{1}{n+1}}<1+\frac{1}{n}$$

or:

$$n2^{\dfrac{1}{n+1}}<n+1$$

This means, going back to our induction, we may now state:

$$2^{\sum\limits_{j=2}^{k+1}\left(\dfrac{1}{j}\right)}<k\cdot2^{\dfrac{1}{k+1}}<k+1$$

or:

$$2^{\sum\limits_{j=2}^{k+1}\left(\dfrac{1}{j}\right)}<k+1$$

We have derived $P_{k+1}$ from $P_k$, thereby completing the proof by induction.
 
Here is a little puzzle from the book 100 Geometric Games by Pierre Berloquin. The side of a small square is one meter long and the side of a larger square one and a half meters long. One vertex of the large square is at the center of the small square. The side of the large square cuts two sides of the small square into one- third parts and two-thirds parts. What is the area where the squares overlap?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
959
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K