Understanding Mathematical Induction: Solving 2^n Series Equation

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on proving the series equation for \( n \geq 1 \): \( 2 + 2^{2} + 2^{3} + ... + 2^{n} = 2^{n+1} - 2 \) using mathematical induction. The proof involves establishing the base case \( P(1) \) and assuming \( P(k) \) is true to show \( P(k+1) \) is also true. The well-ordering axiom is highlighted as a foundational principle, asserting that every non-empty set of positive integers contains a least element, which is crucial for the validity of induction. This method confirms that if \( P(n) \) is false for some integers, it leads to a contradiction, thereby proving \( P(n) \) is true for all positive integers.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of mathematical induction
  • Familiarity with the well-ordering axiom
  • Basic knowledge of series and sequences
  • Ability to manipulate exponential expressions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the well-ordering axiom in detail
  • Practice additional examples of mathematical induction proofs
  • Explore the implications of induction in number theory
  • Learn about other proof techniques such as contradiction and contrapositive
USEFUL FOR

Students of mathematics, educators teaching mathematical proofs, and anyone interested in understanding the principles of mathematical induction and its applications.

Stratosphere
Messages
373
Reaction score
0
I was given the problem: For n \geq 1, 2 + 2^{2} + 2^{3} + 2^{4} + ... + 2^{n} = 2^{n+1} – 2.
I did the induction on it and got 2^{k+2}-2. I know this is the right answer but I don't know WHY. Could anyone explain it to me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well for proving induction, you assume it is true for n=k. Then we prove true for n=k+1, meaning we show that the next term should be true as well...So basically you are saying that, for n=k your statement p(n) which is now p(k), is true implies that p(k+1) is true and by extension p(k) is proven true.
 
How would you know if it's NOT true?
 
If the base case fails or if p(n) doesn't imply p(n+1)
 
Well, perhaps I'm misunderstanding your question but it seems like you're asking why mathematical induction works. The best treatment (by this I mean the simplest to understand) that I've seen used the well-ordering axiom so here goes nothing . . .

*Disclaimer* I'm not positive that this is the correct use of the well-ordering axiom or even the correct statement, this is just what one of my old textbooks says.

Well-Ordering Axiom: Every non-empty set of positive integers contains a least element. Essentially this means that if we consider a set of positive integers that is non-empty (contains some numbers), that set must have a smallest element or number. So, if we consider the non-empty set {2,3,4}, it contains a least element 2.

Proof by Induction: The proof begins by establishing that a given statement P(n) is true for n = 1. Now, let's assume that P(n) is not true for some values of n. Since this set of numbers is non-empty we can apply the well-ordering axiom. Therefore, there must be some least value n = k + 1 such that P(n) is not true. Since we know that P(n) is true when n = 1 and we know that P(n) is first false for n = k + 1, we can clearly see that P(n) must be true when n = k. Now, given that P(k) is true, if we can show that P(k + 1) is also true, that means that our assumption that P(n) was false for some positive integers n must have been incorrect. Therefore, P(n) is true for all positive integers n.

We can, of course modify this procedure slightly to fit the needs of the proof (suppose P(n) is only true if n > 3). What I liked a lot about this treatment is that it really explains why induction works and why we must use natural numbers.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K