Proving a sequence (defined recursively) is monotonically decreasing

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a recursively defined sequence of real numbers, specifically a(1) = 6 and a(n) = (1/4)(2*a(n−1) − 3) for n >= 2. The objective is to demonstrate that the sequence is monotonically decreasing.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to use mathematical induction to prove the sequence is decreasing, starting with a base case and induction step.
  • Some participants question the effectiveness of the original poster's approach and suggest considering a change of variables to simplify the recurrence relation.
  • Others propose examining the differences between terms directly to establish monotonicity.
  • There is discussion about the introduction of a new sequence, b(n), to facilitate the analysis, though some participants express skepticism about this approach.

Discussion Status

Contextual Notes

There is some confusion regarding the correct formulation of the recurrence relation and the choice of constants in the transformation to the new sequence. Participants are navigating these issues while trying to maintain clarity in their reasoning.

Woolyabyss
Messages
142
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


A sequence (an) of real numbers is defined by a(1) = 6, a(n) = (1/4)(2*a(n−1) − 3) for n >= 2. where n is a natural number

show the sequence is monotonically decreasing

Homework Equations


None

The Attempt at a Solution



I tried to prove it by induction.
Let P(n) be the predicate that a(n) < a(n-1)[/B]

base case

p(2)...

a(1) = 6
a(2) = (1/4)*(2*6-3) = 9/4
a(2) < a(1) ... base case is true

induction step

assume p(k) to be true

a(k) < a(k-1)

now we try to prove p(k+1) is true using or assumption about p(k)

a(k+1) = (1/4)*(2(k) - 3)

rearranging

a(k) = 2*a(k+1) - 3

using our assumption

a(k-1) < 2*a(k+1) - 3

I'm not sure where to go from here I can't think of anyway of relating a(k) and a(k+1) with an inequality.
any help would be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Consider the recurrence b_n = \frac12 b_{n-1} with b_1 &gt; 0. Is that sequence monotonic decreasing?

Unfortunately your recurrence a_n = \frac12 a_{n-1} - \frac34 has an extra term on the right, but a linear change of variable to b_n = a_n + C for some constant C should remove it.
 
pasmith said:
Consider the recurrence b_n = \frac12 b_{n-1} with b_1 &gt; 0. Is that sequence monotonic decreasing?

Unfortunately your recurrence a_n = \frac12 a_{n-1} - \frac34 has an extra term on the right, but a linear change of variable to b_n = a_n + C for some constant C should remove it.

so if we go back to a(k+1) = a(k)/2 - 3/4

let b(n) = a(k) - 3/2

so that a(k+1) = (1/2)*b(n)

b(n) is greater than a(k+1)

i.e.
a(k)/2 - 3/4 > a(k+1)

so I've got the an inequality in terms of the two terms of the sequence I need

rearranging

a(k) - 2a(k+1) > 3/2

i.e a(k) > 2a(k+1)

a(k+1) is positive

so a(k) > a(k+1)

would this be correct?
 
Last edited:
Woolyabyss said:
so if we go back to a(k+1) = a(k)/2 - 3/4

let b(n) = a(k) - 3/2

so that a(k+1) = (1/2)*b(n)
I think you mean b(k) = a(k)-3/2, and the next line should be a recurrence relation on the b's, no a terms in sight.
 
haruspex said:
I think you mean b(k) = a(k)-3/2, and the next line should be a recurrence relation on the b's, no a terms in sight.

I tried getting rid of the a's

b(k) = a(k)-3/2

b(k+1) = a(k+1) - 3/2

b(k+1) = (1/4)(2*a(k) -3) -3/2

b(k+1) = (1/2)*b(n) -3/2

I've got a recurrence relation in b now but I'm not sure where to go from here other than saying

2*b(k+1) = b(n) -3

b(n) - 2*b(k+1) = 3
 
Woolyabyss said:
I tried getting rid of the a's

b(k) = a(k)-3/2

b(k+1) = a(k+1) - 3/2

b(k+1) = (1/4)(2*a(k) -3) -3/2

b(k+1) = (1/2)*b(n) -3/2

I've got a recurrence relation in b now but I'm not sure where to go from here other than saying

2*b(k+1) = b(n) -3

b(n) - 2*b(k+1) = 3
You've chosen the wrong C. Start again, substituting bn-C for an everywhere in the recurrence relation for an (being careful not switch between k and n this time) and post the equation you get for the b sequence (with C still in it).
 
I don't see any good reason to introduce this new "b" sequence. To show that a sequence is increasing, it is enough to show that a_{n+1}- a_n&gt; 0.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K