Show that a quantified statement is true:

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter zethieo
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion revolves around proving the quantified statement ∃λ∈R+, ∃m∈Z+, ∀n∈m..+∞, 2n+100≤λn, which asserts that there exists a positive constant λ such that the inequality holds for sufficiently large n. The participants clarify that while 2n+100 is greater than n for all n>0, a constant λ, such as 3, can be found to satisfy the inequality from a certain point m onward. Specifically, m is determined to be 100, validating the statement as true.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantified statements in mathematics
  • Familiarity with Big-O notation
  • Basic knowledge of inequalities and limits
  • Proficiency in mathematical proofs and logic
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of Big-O notation in depth
  • Explore the concept of limits in mathematical analysis
  • Learn about proving inequalities in calculus
  • Investigate advanced topics in mathematical logic and quantified statements
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, computer scientists, students studying algorithm analysis, and anyone interested in mathematical proofs and inequalities.

zethieo
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
for example this question:
∃λ∈R+, ∃m∈Z+,∀n∈m..+∞,2n+100≤λn

To be honest I'm really struggling to understand this math, and I'm actually not even totally sure what this question is called. If anyone could explain this to me or point me to some good tutorials I'd really appreciate it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This seems like the statement saying that $2n+100$ is $O(n)$. If you don't know what the big-O notation is, please ignore this.

The statement says that even though $2n+100>n$ for all $n>0$, we can find a positive constant $\lambda$ such that $2n+100\le\lambda n$. For example, $\lambda=3$ looks promising. The second subtlety is that $2n+100\le3n$ does not hold for all $n>0$, but only eventually, i.e., from some point $m$ on. Can you find such $m$ if $\lambda=3$?
 
So that would mean m = 100, which proves the statement to be true.

This doesn't seem that bad, thanks for the help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K