Proving the Cauchy Inequality for Natural Numbers

  • Thread starter Thread starter ArcanaNoir
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the Cauchy inequality for natural numbers, specifically focusing on the expression involving variables a, b, and n. Participants are exploring whether the equality holds under certain conditions and what those conditions might entail.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the validity of the original statement and exploring specific cases to test its truth. Some suggest algebraic manipulation to demonstrate implications, while others express uncertainty about the proof's requirements and the implications of the variables involved.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights and questioning the assumptions behind the original statement. There is a recognition that one implication may be easier to prove than the other, and some participants are seeking clarification on the necessary conditions for the proof.

Contextual Notes

There are constraints noted regarding the values of a, b, and n, specifically that a and b must be greater than zero and that n is a natural number. Additionally, the need for the proof to establish a biconditional relationship is emphasized.

ArcanaNoir
Messages
778
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


I'm working on a Cauchy inequality proof, and I'm at a point where I need to prove:
a+ \frac{b}{n} = a\sqrt[n]{b} iff a=b

Anyway, is it even possible to prove this? If it isn't I need to hurry up and get about another method. If it is possible, I don't mind thinking on it some more.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi ArcanaNoir! :smile:

This doesn't seem true. Take a=b=n=2, then

a+\frac{b}{n}=3

but

a\sqrt{n}{b}=2\sqrt{2}

and these are certainly not equal. So at least one of the implications fails.

Looking at the graph of

x+\frac{y}{2}-x\sqrt{y}

suggest that the other implication fails as well.
 
Oh dear.
 
Okay, I think I fixed it.
\frac{na+b}{n+1}=\sqrt[n+1]{a^nb}
 
I'm not well versed in proof writing but couldn't you just algebraically show it's true for a=b?

As in:

\frac{na + a}{n+1} = \sqrt[n+1]{a^na}
\frac{(n+1)a}{n+1} = \sqrt[n+1]{a^{n+1}}
a = a

Though this would require that n cannot equal -1, but I think you may already have that restriction.
 
Clever-Name said:
I'm not well versed in proof writing but couldn't you just algebraically show it's true for a=b?

As in:

\frac{na + a}{n+1} = \sqrt[n+1]{a^na}
\frac{(n+1)a}{n+1} = \sqrt[n+1]{a^{n+1}}
a = a

Though this would require that n cannot equal -1, but I think you may already have that restriction.
This would only prove one implication. This is an if and only if proof, so you have to prove that
a=b \implies \frac{na + b}{n+1}=\sqrt[n+1]{a^nb}
AND
\frac{na + b}{n+1} = \sqrt[n+1]{a^nb} \implies a=b
 
Last edited:
isn't that what the op wants though? This statement is true iff a=b...
 
BrianMath is right. It's the second thing I need most, the first part of the biconditional is easy.

A and b are greater than zero and n is a natural number.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K