Proving the Archimedian Property for Real Numbers

  • Thread starter Thread starter pzzldstudent
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof Property
pzzldstudent
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
Statement to prove:
If x > 0, show there exists n in N (the set of all natural numbers) such that 1/(2^n) < x.

My work on the proof so far:
Let x > 0. By the Archimedian Property, we know if ε > 0, there exists an n in N such that 1/n < ε.
Take x = ε . So there exists an n in N such that 1/n < x.

That is as far as I've gotten. I am stuck as to how I can algebraically manipulate the inequality to get the 2 in there somehow and to get the final form of 1/(2^n) < x.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you show 2^n>n for n>1?
 
That statement 2^n > n sounds familiar. I think we proved something like that using math induction before. So if I can state that, then it would be helpful in finishing the proof, right?

Thanks for looking!
 
pzzldstudent said:
That statement 2^n > n sounds familiar. I think we proved something like that using math induction before. So if I can state that, then it would be helpful in finishing the proof, right?

Thanks for looking!

Since that would mean 1/2^n<1/n, I think it would be extremely helpful. You're welcome.
 
Dick said:
Since that would mean 1/2^n<1/n, I think it would be extremely helpful. You're welcome.

Thanks again for the help!

I think I got it [I have a proof within a proof]:

My proof: Let x > 0. By induction 2^n > n
(Proof: Base case: for n = 1, 2^1 > 1. Check. Inductive step: Assume true for n = k, k a natural number. That is 2^k > k is true. To show this true for k + 1, we need to show 2^(k+1) > k +1 which implies 2*2^k > k +1. By assumption that 2^k > k, then 2*2^k > 2k. But for all k ≥ 1, 2k ≥ k + 1, so
2^(k+1) > 2k ≥ k+1. Therefore 2^(k+1) > k + 1, and 2^n > n. QED)
So since 2^n > n, then 1/2^n < 1/n. By the Archimedian Property, 1/n < x. Therefore
1/2^n < 1/n < x which implies 1/2^n < x. QED.
 
You nailed it.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top