Proving the Proportionality of a Sum Involving Induction

  • Thread starter Thread starter courtrigrad
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Induction Sum
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the proportionality of a sum involving alternating terms and induction, specifically the expression \(\sum_{k=1}^{2n} (-1)^{k}(2k+1)\) and its relationship to \(n\).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to establish a relationship between the sum and \(n\) by using induction, questioning whether their approach is correct. Other participants point out potential errors in the original poster's reasoning and calculations, particularly regarding the inclusion of terms in the summation.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the original poster's approach, providing feedback and corrections. There is a mix of interpretations regarding the value of the constant of proportionality \(p\), with some suggesting it is 2, while others reference earlier calculations that suggest a different value. The discussion is ongoing, with no clear consensus reached yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating through the implications of their assumptions and the correctness of their mathematical manipulations, particularly in the context of induction and summation terms.

courtrigrad
Messages
1,236
Reaction score
2
Prove that [tex]\sum_{k=1}^{2n} (-1)^{k}(2k+1)[/tex] is proportional to [tex]n[/tex], and find the constant of proportionality. So I have to prove that: [tex]\sum_{k=1}^{2n} (-1)^{k}(2k+1) = np[/tex] where [tex]p[/tex] is the constant of proportionality. So for [tex]n =1[/tex] we have [tex]\sum_{k=1}^{2} (-1)^{k}(2k+1) = 2[/tex]. In this case, [tex]p = \frac{1}{2}[/tex]. For [tex]n =s[/tex] we have [tex]\sum_{k=1}^{2s}(-1)^{k}(2k+1) = -3 + 5 + ... + (-1)^{2s}(4s+1) = ps[/tex] which we assume to be true. Then for [tex]n = s+1[/tex] we have [tex]\sum_{k=1}^{2s+2} (-1)^{k}(2k+1) = p(s+1)[/tex] which we want to prove from the case [tex]n = s[/tex]. So [tex]\sum_{k=1}^{2s+2}(-1)^{k}(2k+1) = (\sum_{k=1}^{2s} (-1)^{k}(2k+1))+(-1)^{2s+1}(4s+3)[/tex].

Am I doing this correctly? I am stuck at this part.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You left out a term in your last equation:

[tex]\sum^{2s+2}a_k = \sum^{2s} a_k + a_{2s+1} + a_{2s+2}[/tex]
 
So that means [tex]\sum_{k=1}^{2n+2} = (\sum_{k=1}^{2s} a_{k}) + a_{2n+1}+a_{2n+2} = ps + (-1)^{2n+1}(4n+3) + (-1)^{2s+2}(4s+5) = ps-4n-3 + 4s + 5 = ps + 2[/tex]. So [tex]ps+2 = ps + p[/tex] so does that mean [tex]p = 2[/tex]?

Thanks
 
Yes, p = 2, not 1 / 2. This part is wrong.
courtrigrad said:
So for [tex]n =1[/tex] we have [tex]\sum_{k=1}^{2} (-1)^{k}(2k+1) = 2[/tex]. In this case, [tex]p = \frac{1}{2}[/tex]
[tex]\sum_{k=1}^{2} (-1)^{k}(2k+1) = 2 = np = 1 \times p = p[/tex]
So p = 2.
:)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K