Proving the Induction Relationship: 1 = 1, 1 - 2^2 = -(1+2), and More!

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Venomily
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Induction Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving a mathematical relationship involving alternating sums of squares and their equivalence to sums of natural numbers. Participants explore methods of mathematical induction, assumptions for odd and even cases, and the application of known summation formulas.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a proof by induction for the relationship, asserting it holds for all natural numbers based on initial cases.
  • Another participant questions the assumption made for n, suggesting it should specify whether n is odd or even, and proposes a different induction setup using k.
  • A later reply echoes the concern about the assumption and suggests that proving one case could imply the other, while also expressing a desire for a more straightforward approach.
  • Some participants mention the utility of the well-known summation property for natural numbers, indicating it simplifies the proof process.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the approach to the proof, particularly regarding the assumptions made for n. There is no consensus on a single method, and multiple perspectives on the induction process remain present.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for clarity in assumptions and the potential complexity of rearranging expressions in proofs. The discussion reflects various strategies and considerations in mathematical induction without resolving the overall approach.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in mathematical proofs, particularly those involving induction and summation techniques, may find this discussion relevant.

Venomily
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
[tex]1 = 1[/tex]
[tex]1 - 2^2 = -(1+2)[/tex]
[tex]1 - 2^2 + 3^2 = (1+2+3)[/tex]
[tex]1^2 - 2^2 + 3^2 - 4^2 = -(1+2+3+4)[/tex]

and so on.

I have to prove that this relationship is true for all natural numbers. This is what I did:

clearly it is true for 1, 2, 3 and 4.

assume true for n odd:

[tex]1^2 - 2^2 + 3^2 - 4^2 ... + n^2 = (1 + 2 + +3 + 4... + n)[/tex]

tidying things up a bit and inducting (n+1) and (n+2) we can obtain this pattern:

[tex](1^2 - 1) + (3^2 - 3)... + ((n-1)^2 - (n-1)) + ((n+1)^2 - (n+1)) = (2^2 + 2) + (4^2 + 4) +... + (n^2 + n) + ((n+2)^2 + (n+2))[/tex]

The [tex]((n+1)^2 - (n+1))[/tex] from the LHS cancels with the [tex](n^2 + n)[/tex] on the RHS if you play around with it, therefore the equality holds for every n+2 given any n >= 4. The same argument can be applied to the case in which n is even, QED.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Venomily said:
assume true for n:

[tex]1^2 - 2^2 + 3^2 - 4^2 ... + n^2 = (1 + 2 + +3 + 4... + n)[/tex]

If you're going to assume true for n, then on the very next line you have +n2 as the last term on the LHS and a positive sum on the RHS, then you should specify "assume true for n odd" or something along those lines.

Also, it's unnecessary to take it in two cases, just set up your assumption as,

Assume true for n=k:

[tex]1^2 - 2^2 + 3^2 - ... + (-1)^{k-1}k^2=(-1)^{k-1}(1+2+3+...+k)[/tex]

Now prove it is true for n=k+1.
 
Mentallic said:
If you're going to assume true for n, then on the very next line you have +n2 as the last term on the LHS and a positive sum on the RHS, then you should specify "assume true for n odd" or something along those lines.

Also, it's unnecessary to take it in two cases, just set up your assumption as,

Assume true for n=k:


[tex]1^2 - 2^2 + 3^2 - ... + (-1)^{k-1}k^2=(-1)^{k-1}(1+2+3+...+k)[/tex]

Now prove it is true for n=k+1.

@bold, how would you go about proving it then? rearranging the expression would be tedious with a multiplier (is there a better way?). I thought it would be easier to take the two cases since if you prove one case you imply the other.

EDIT: nvm, I found a more refined way of doing it using the (-1)^k-1, thanks.
 
Last edited:
If you use the well known summation property [tex]1+2+3+...+n=\frac{n(n+1)}{2}[/tex] it becomes very easy to solve.
 
Mentallic said:
If you use the well known summation property [tex]1+2+3+...+n=\frac{n(n+1)}{2}[/tex] it becomes very easy to solve.

thanks, I forgot about using known results :p Yes, it becomes very easy now.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
7K