MHB Proving the Formula of Fibonacci Numbers

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathworker
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Numbers
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the relationship between Fibonacci numbers and their sums, specifically that 1 plus the sum of the first n Fibonacci numbers equals the (n+2)th Fibonacci number. The proof is approached using mathematical induction, establishing a base case and an induction hypothesis. An alternative method without induction is also presented, utilizing the properties of Fibonacci numbers to derive the same conclusion. Both methods confirm that the formula holds true for Fibonacci sequences. The conclusion is that the relationship 1 + S_n = t_{n+2} is valid, where S_n is the sum of the first n terms.
mathworker
Messages
110
Reaction score
0
we all know Fibonacci numbers,just for information
they are the numbers of sequence whose $$t_n=t_{n-1}+t_{n-2}$$ and $$t_0=t_1=1$$

$$\text{PROVE THAT:}$$
$$1+S_n=t_{n+2}$$
where,
$$S_n=\text{sum up-to n terms}$$
$$t_n=\text{nth term}$$
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Re: fibonacci numbers

We can use induction here (I prefer the notation $F_n$ for the $n$th Fibonacci number). The base case $P_0$ is:

$$1+S_0=F_{0+2}$$

$$1=1$$

This is true. The induction hypothesis $P_k$ is then:

$$1+S_k=F_{k+2}$$

Add $$F_{k+1}$$ to both sides:

$$1+S_k+F_{k+1}=F_{k+2}+F_{k+1}$$

$$1+S_{k+1}=F_{(k+1)+2}$$

We have derived $P_{k+1}$ from $P_{k}$ thereby completing the proof by induction.
 
Re: fibonacci numbers

mathworker said:
we all know Fibonacci numbers,just for information
they are the numbers of sequence whose $$t_n=t_{n-1}+t_{n-2}$$ and $$t_0=t_1=1$$

$$\text{PROVE THAT:}$$
$$1+S_n=t_{n+2}$$
where,
$$S_n=\text{sum up-to n terms}$$
$$t_n=\text{nth term}$$

I'm going to do this without induction. The relation used to rewrite the terms in the sum will be $t_k=t_{k+2}-t_{k+1}$ for $k=0,\ldots,n$.

We have that
\[\begin{aligned}S_n &= t_n + t_{n-1}+t_{n-2}+\ldots+t_3+t_2+t_1+t_0\\ &= \underbrace{(t_{n+2}-t_{n+1})}_{t_n} + \underbrace{(t_{n+1}-t_n)}_{t_{n-1}} +\underbrace{(t_n-t_{n-1})}_{t_{n-2}} + \underbrace{(t_{n-1}-t_{n-2})}_{t_{n-3}} +\ldots+\underbrace{(t_5-t_4)}_{t_3} + \underbrace{(t_4-t_3)}_{t_2} + \underbrace{(t_3-t_2)}_{t_1}+\underbrace{(t_2-t_1)}_{t_0} \\ &= t_{n+2} -t_1\\ &= t_{n+2}-1\end{aligned}\]
Thus, $S_n=t_{n+2}-1\implies \boxed{1+S_n=t_{n+2}}$
 
I have been insisting to my statistics students that for probabilities, the rule is the number of significant figures is the number of digits past the leading zeros or leading nines. For example to give 4 significant figures for a probability: 0.000001234 and 0.99999991234 are the correct number of decimal places. That way the complementary probability can also be given to the same significant figures ( 0.999998766 and 0.00000008766 respectively). More generally if you have a value that...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
960