Results 1 to 15 of 15

Math Help - Mathematical Induction Problem.

  1. #1
    Rel
    Rel is offline
    Newbie
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2

    Mathematical Induction Problem.

    Using mathematical induction
    proof this formula.

    the formula is attached the jpg files
    [Sorry I hard to using type that formula so I captured that

    Please help.T_T
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Mathematical Induction Problem.-proof.jpg  
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Super Member
    Joined
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    806
    Thanks
    4
    For n = 2 you can prove it easily.
    (a1+a2)/2 > sqrt(a1*a2)
    (a1+a2) > 2*sqrt(a1*a2)
    (a1+a2)^2 >4(a1*a2)
    (a1+a2)^2 - 4(a1*a2) > 0
    (a1-a2)^2 > 0
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Rel
    Rel is offline
    Newbie
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by sa-ri-ga-ma View Post
    For n = 2 you can prove it easily.
    (a1+a2)/2 > sqrt(a1*a2)
    (a1+a2) > 2*sqrt(a1*a2)
    (a1+a2)^2 >4(a1*a2)
    (a1+a2)^2 - 4(a1*a2) > 0
    (a1-a2)^2 > 0
    That's right but that only n=2 case
    I want prove that formula using Mathematical induction by all of n.

    sorry.
    that is not answer in this problem.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    MHF Contributor
    Joined
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,120
    Thanks
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Rel View Post
    Using mathematical induction
    proof this formula.

    the formula is attached the jpg files
    [Sorry I hard to using type that formula so I captured that

    Please help.T_T
    Hi Rel,

    You could consider using the properties of logarithms.

    P(n)

    \frac{a_1+a_2+a_3+....+a_n}{n}\ \ge\ \left(a_1\ a_2\ a_3\ ....a_n\right)^{\frac{1}{n}}

    We want to show that this causes P(n+1) to be true

    P(n+1)

    \frac{a_1+a_2+a_3+...+a_n+a_{n+1}}{n+1}\ \ge\ \left(a_1\ a_2\ a_3\ ....a_n\ a_{n+1}\right)^{\frac{1}{n+1}}

    Proof

    \frac{a_1}{n}+\frac{a_2}{n}+\frac{a_3}{n}+...+\fra  c{a_n}{n}\ \ge\ (a_1)^{\frac{1}{n}}\ (a_2)^{\frac{1}{n}}\ (a_3)^{\frac{1}{n}}\ ....(a_n)^{\frac{1}{n}}

    \left(\frac{n}{n+1}\right)\left(\frac{a_1}{n}+\fra  c{a_2}{n}+....+\frac{a_n}{n}+\frac{a_{n+1}}{n}\rig  ht)\ \ge\ (a_1)^{\frac{1}{n+1}}\ (a_2)^{\frac{1}{n+1}}\ .....(a_n)^{\frac{1}{n+1}}\ (a_{n+1})^{\frac{1}{n+1}} ?

    \Rightarrow\ \frac{n}{n+1}\left[\frac{a_1}{n}+....+\frac{a_n}{n}\right]+\frac{a_{n+1}}{n+1}\ \ge\ (a_1)^{\frac{1}{n}\ \frac{n}{n+1}}\ (a_2)^{\frac{1}{n}\ \frac{n}{n+1}}....(a_n)^{\frac{1}{n}\ \frac{n}{n+1}}\ (a_{n+1})^{\frac{1}{n}\ \frac{n}{n+1}}

    \Rightarrow\ \frac{n}{n+1}\left[\frac{a_1}{n}+....+\frac{a_n}{n}\right]+\frac{a_{n+1}}{n+1}\ \ge\ \left((a_1)^{\frac{1}{n}}\ (a_2)^{\frac{1}{n}}....(a_n)^{\frac{1}{n}}\right)^  {\frac{n}{n+1}}\ (a_{n+1})^{\frac{1}{n+1}}

    Now, notice that

    log\left[\left((a_1)^{\frac{1}{n}}\ (a_2)^{\frac{1}{n}}.....(a_n)^{\frac{1}{n}}\right)  ^{\frac{n}{n+1}}\ (a_{n+1})^{\frac{1}{n+1}}\right]  =\frac{n}{n+1}\left((a_1)^{\frac{1}{n}}\ (a_2)^{\frac{1}{n}}...(a_n)^{\frac{1}{n}}\right)+\  frac{a_{n+1}}{n+1}

    and the proof follows since

    x>logx

    Whoops!! massive typo!! I left out the logs in the RHS
    so there is no proof!!
    Last edited by Archie Meade; April 2nd 2010 at 09:56 AM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Banned
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    4,261
    Thanks
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Archie Meade View Post
    Hi Rel,

    You could consider using the properties of logarithms.

    P(n)

    \frac{a_1+a_2+a_3+....+a_n}{n}\ \ge\ \left(a_1\ a_2\ a_3\ ....a_n\right)^{\frac{1}{n}}

    We want to show that this causes P(n+1) to be true

    P(n+1)

    \frac{a_1+a_2+a_3+...+a_n+a_{n+1}}{n+1}\ \ge\ \left(a_1\ a_2\ a_3\ ....a_n\ a_{n+1}\right)^{\frac{1}{n+1}}

    Proof

    \frac{a_1}{n}+\frac{a_2}{n}+\frac{a_3}{n}+...+\fra  c{a_n}{n}\ \ge\ (a_1)^{\frac{1}{n}}\ (a_2)^{\frac{1}{n}}\ (a_3)^{\frac{1}{n}}\ ....(a_n)^{\frac{1}{n}}

    \left(\frac{n}{n+1}\right)\left(\frac{a_1}{n}+\fra  c{a_2}{n}+....+\frac{a_n}{n}+\frac{a_{n+1}}{n}\rig  ht)\ \ge\ (a_1)^{\frac{1}{n+1}}\ (a_2)^{\frac{1}{n+1}}\ .....(a_n)^{\frac{1}{n+1}}\ (a_{n+1})^{\frac{1}{n+1}} ?

    \Rightarrow\ \frac{n}{n+1}\left[\frac{a_1}{n}+....+\frac{a_n}{n}\right]+\frac{a_{n+1}}{n+1}\ \ge\ (a_1)^{\frac{1}{n}\ \frac{n}{n+1}}\ (a_2)^{\frac{1}{n}\ \frac{n}{n+1}}....(a_n)^{\frac{1}{n}\ \frac{n}{n+1}}\ (a_{n+1})^{\frac{1}{n}\ \frac{n}{n+1}}

    \Rightarrow\ \frac{n}{n+1}\left[\frac{a_1}{n}+....+\frac{a_n}{n}\right]+\frac{a_{n+1}}{n+1}\ \ge\ \left((a_1)^{\frac{1}{n}}\ (a_2)^{\frac{1}{n}}....(a_n)^{\frac{1}{n}}\right)^  {\frac{n}{n+1}}\ (a_{n+1})^{\frac{1}{n+1}}

    Now, notice that

    log\left[\left((a_1)^{\frac{1}{n}}\ (a_2)^{\frac{1}{n}}.....(a_n)^{\frac{1}{n}}\right)  ^{\frac{n}{n+1}}\ (a_{n+1})^{\frac{1}{n+1}}\right]  =\frac{n}{n+1}\left((a_1)^{\frac{1}{n}}\ (a_2)^{\frac{1}{n}}...(a_n)^{\frac{1}{n}}\right)+\  frac{a_{n+1}}{n+1}


    Surely you meant \log\left[\left((a_1)^{\frac{1}{n}}\ (a_2)^{\frac{1}{n}}.....(a_n)^{\frac{1}{n}}\right)  ^{\frac{n}{n+1}}\ (a_{n+1})^{\frac{1}{n+1}}\right]  =\frac{n}{n+1}\log\left((a_1)^{\frac{1}{n}}\ (a_2)^{\frac{1}{n}}...(a_n)^{\frac{1}{n}}\right)+\  frac{1}{n+1}\log a_{n+1} , but then I don't see clearly how to continue...

    Tonio

    and the proof follows since

    x>logx
    .
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    MHF Contributor
    Joined
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,120
    Thanks
    1
    Thanks tonio,

    starting from scratch,
    we can apply a few manipulations for convenience...

    If the following is true

    \frac{A_1+A_2+......+A_n}{n}\ \ge\ \sqrt[n]{A_1A_2....A_n}

    we attempt to prove that it causes

    \frac{A_1+A_2+....+A_n+A_{n+1}}{n+1}\ \ge\ \sqrt[n+1]{A_1A_2....A_nA_{n+1}}

    to be true.

    Rewriting a_i=\sqrt[n]{A_i} for i=1,2,....,n

    we try to prove

    {a_1}^n+{a_2}^n+....+{a_n}^n\ \ge\ na_1a_2....a_n

    by showing that it causes

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+...{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}^{  k+1}\ \ge\ (k+1)a_1a_2....a_ka_{k+1}

    Proof

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....+{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}  ^{k+1}=a_1{a_1}^k+a_2{a_2}^k+....+\color{red}a_k\c  olor{black}{a_k}^k+\color{blue}a_{k+1}\color{black  }{a_{k+1}}^k

    To develop the inequality, the following may be utilised...

    x_1\ \ge\ x_2,\ y_1\ \ge\ y_2\ \Rightarrow\ x_1y_1+x_2y_2\ \ge\ x_1y_2+x_2y_1

    This is because

    x_1y_1+x_2y_2-(x_1y_2+x_2y_1)=x_1(y_1-y_2)-x_2(y_1-y_2)=(x_1-x_2)(y_1-y_2)\ \ge\ 0

    Hence, if the terms are arranged in decreasing order...

    a_1\ \ge\ a_2\ \ge\ a_3\ \ge.....\ge\ a_k\ \ge\ a_{k+1}

    a_1{a_1}^k+a_2{a_2}^k+....+\color{red}a_k\color{bl  ack}{a_k}^k+\color{blue}a_{k+1}\color{black}{a_{k+  1}}^k\ \ge\ a_1{a_1}^k+a_2{a_2}^k+....+\color{blue}a_{k+1}\col  or{black}{a_k}^k+\color{red}a_k\color{black}{a_{k+  1}}^k

    Therefore

    a_1{a_1}^k+a_2{a_2}^k+...+a_k{a_k}^k+a_{k+1}{a_{k+  1}}^k\ \ge\ (a_{k+1}{a_1}^k+a_{k+1}{a_2}^k+....a_{k+1}{a_k}^k)  +a_k{a_{k+1}}^k

    \ge\ a_{k+1}({a_1}^k+{a_2}^k+...+{a_k}^k)+a_k{a_{k+1}}^  k

    Hence

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}^  {k+1}\ \ge\ a_{k+1}({a_1}^k+{a_2}^k+...+{a_k}^k)+a_k{a_{k+1}}^  k

    Since the terms are arranged in decreasing order, then a_i\ \ge\ a_{k+1}

    Hence

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}^  {k+1}\ \ge\ a_{k+1}({a_1}^k+{a_2}^k+...+{a_k}^k)+a_1a_2...a_ka  _{k+1}

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}^  {k+1}\ \ge\ [a_{k+1}]\left[({a_1}^k+{a_2}^k+...+{a_k}^k)+a_1a_2...a_k\right]

    If the original statement is true, {a_1}^k+{a_1}^k+...+{a_k}^k\ \ge\ ka_1a_2...a_k

    then

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....+{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}  ^{k+1}\ \ge\ a_{k+1}[(ka_1a_2...a_k)+a_1a_2...a_k]

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....+{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}  ^{k+1}\ \ge\ (k+1)(a_1a_2....a_{k+1})
    Last edited by Archie Meade; April 2nd 2010 at 01:35 PM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  7. #7
    Newbie
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4

    Above Answer does not work

    Just to note, the above answer does not work. I'm not sure how to exactly solve it, but if you follow the above string of logic, it doesn't work for 2 reasons.
    A) You state that "if we assume the sequence decreases" there is nothing in the original problem that says the sequence decreases, only that all numbers of a are greater than 0. they could all be positive and be completely random. It does not make a difference.
    b) second of all, if one assumes that a1 is greater than a2 which is greater than a3 etc, then akak+1^k cannot be greater than a1a2....akak+1 simply because akak+1^k has the exact same amount of digits as a1a2.....akak+1, but since a1 is (by transitive property) greater than or equal to ak+1, then the inequality must be false (it can be equal to, but not greater than. If it was simply equal to, it would be a formula, not an inequality, so therefore, that one step does not connect with the previous one)

    Other than that, the logic is fine, but since most of the problem only works ASSUMING that the sequence is decreasing, which the problem does not state. If you want to state that the sequence is decreasing, then you would need to prove it somehow. Also, if the sequence is decreasing, then that last chain of logic does not work, as stated above.

    On the other hand, I'm not sure how to actually solve it, but I think I'm quite right in noticing the flaw(s) in your logic. I would like to see the actual answer to the problem, please reply!

    Oh, by the way, the above Mathematical Induction Problem is hardly Pre-Algebra to Algebra level. I don't even recall doing anything this hard when I did pre-calculus in high school. It should probably be moved to "University Math". Its also the reason why I joined, as I couldn't help but see the flaw, and I felt a need to correct it. I would really like to see a final result though, as I'm not quite sure how to go about solving it either.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  8. #8
    MHF Contributor
    Joined
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,120
    Thanks
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by MathematicalInduction View Post
    Just to note, the above answer does not work. I'm not sure how to exactly solve it, but if you follow the above string of logic, it doesn't work for 2 reasons.
    A) You state that "if we assume the sequence decreases" there is nothing in the original problem that says the sequence decreases, only that all numbers of a are greater than 0. they could all be positive and be completely random. It does not make a difference.
    b) second of all, if one assumes that a1 is greater than a2 which is greater than a3 etc, then akak+1^k cannot be greater than a1a2....akak+1 simply because akak+1^k has the exact same amount of digits as a1a2.....akak+1, but since a1 is (by transitive property) greater than or equal to ak+1, then the inequality must be false (it can be equal to, but not greater than. If it was simply equal to, it would be a formula, not an inequality, so therefore, that one step does not connect with the previous one)

    Other than that, the logic is fine, but since most of the problem only works ASSUMING that the sequence is decreasing, which the problem does not state. If you want to state that the sequence is decreasing, then you would need to prove it somehow. Also, if the sequence is decreasing, then that last chain of logic does not work, as stated above.

    false

    On the other hand, I'm not sure how to actually solve it, but I think I'm quite right in noticing the flaw(s) in your logic. I would like to see the actual answer to the problem, please reply!

    Oh, by the way, the above Mathematical Induction Problem is hardly Pre-Algebra to Algebra level. I don't even recall doing anything this hard when I did pre-calculus in high school. It should probably be moved to "University Math". Its also the reason why I joined, as I couldn't help but see the flaw, and I felt a need to correct it. I would really like to see a final result though, as I'm not quite sure how to go about solving it either.
    I checked this.

    The proof is valid.
    The numbers are placed in order.
    They may not be in that order initially,
    however the proof is correct for the set of numbers.

    Edit.... there is an error! well spotted.
    Last edited by Archie Meade; June 7th 2010 at 07:57 AM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  9. #9
    Newbie
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Archie Meade View Post
    Thanks tonio,

    starting from scratch,
    we can apply a few manipulations for convenience...

    If the following is true

    \frac{A_1+A_2+......+A_n}{n}\ \ge\ \sqrt[n]{A_1A_2....A_n}

    we attempt to prove that it causes

    \frac{A_1+A_2+....+A_n+A_{n+1}}{n+1}\ \ge\ \sqrt[n+1]{A_1A_2....A_nA_{n+1}}

    to be true.

    Rewriting a_i=\sqrt[n]{A_i} for i=1,2,....,n

    we try to prove

    {a_1}^n+{a_2}^n+....+{a_n}^n\ \ge\ na_1a_2....a_n

    by showing that it causes

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+...{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}^{  k+1}\ \ge\ (k+1)a_1a_2....a_ka_{k+1}

    Proof

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....+{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}  ^{k+1}=a_1{a_1}^k+a_2{a_2}^k+....+\color{red}a_k\c  olor{black}{a_k}^k+\color{blue}a_{k+1}\color{black  }{a_{k+1}}^k

    To develop the inequality, the following may be utilised...

    x_1\ \ge\ x_2,\ y_1\ \ge\ y_2\ \Rightarrow\ x_1y_1+x_2y_2\ \ge\ x_1y_2+x_2y_1

    This is because

    x_1y_1+x_2y_2-(x_1y_2+x_2y_1)=x_1(y_1-y_2)-x_2(y_1-y_2)=(x_1-x_2)(y_1-y_2)\ \ge\ 0

    Hence, if the terms are arranged in decreasing order...

    a_1\ \ge\ a_2\ \ge\ a_3\ \ge.....\ge\ a_k\ \ge\ a_{k+1}

    a_1{a_1}^k+a_2{a_2}^k+....+\color{red}a_k\color{bl  ack}{a_k}^k+\color{blue}a_{k+1}\color{black}{a_{k+  1}}^k\ \ge\ a_1{a_1}^k+a_2{a_2}^k+....+\color{blue}a_{k+1}\col  or{black}{a_k}^k+\color{red}a_k\color{black}{a_{k+  1}}^k

    Therefore

    a_1{a_1}^k+a_2{a_2}^k+...+a_k{a_k}^k+a_{k+1}{a_{k+  1}}^k\ \ge\ (a_{k+1}{a_1}^k+a_{k+1}{a_2}^k+....a_{k+1}{a_k}^k)  +a_k{a_{k+1}}^k

    \ge\ a_{k+1}({a_1}^k+{a_2}^k+...+{a_k}^k)+a_k{a_{k+1}}^  k

    Hence

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}^  {k+1}\ \ge\ a_{k+1}({a_1}^k+{a_2}^k+...+{a_k}^k)+a_k{a_{k+1}}^  k<--- how did you prove that this

    Since the terms are arranged in decreasing order, then a_i\ \ge\ a_{k+1}

    Hence

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}^  {k+1}\ \ge\ a_{k+1}({a_1}^k+{a_2}^k+...+{a_k}^k)+a_1a_2...a_ka  _{k+1} <------- is less than or equal to that? the way i solved it, it ended up be greater than or equal to. can you please explain it more in depth? i'm not quite sure I understand your logic there. everything else i get but that

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}^  {k+1}\ \ge\ [a_{k+1}]\left[({a_1}^k+{a_2}^k+...+{a_k}^k)+a_1a_2...a_k\right]

    If the original statement is true, {a_1}^k+{a_1}^k+...+{a_k}^k\ \ge\ ka_1a_2...a_k

    then

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....+{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}  ^{k+1}\ \ge\ a_{k+1}[(ka_1a_2...a_k)+a_1a_2...a_k]

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....+{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}  ^{k+1}\ \ge\ (k+1)(a_1a_2....a_{k+1})
    ok, so i understand what you did with the decreasing order thing.
    however, please explain the above step, thanks.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  10. #10
    Banned
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    4,261
    Thanks
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by MathematicalInduction View Post
    Just to note, the above answer does not work. I'm not sure how to exactly solve it, but if you follow the above string of logic, it doesn't work for 2 reasons.
    A) You state that "if we assume the sequence decreases" there is nothing in the original problem that says the sequence decreases, only that all numbers of a are greater than 0. they could all be positive and be completely random. It does not make a difference.


    I couldn't see anywhere in his proof "assuming". He just arranged the terms of the sequence in decreasing order which can always be done in a finite set of real numbers.

    In fact his proof is a rather standard one to prove the means inequality.

    Tonio


    b) second of all, if one assumes that a1 is greater than a2 which is greater than a3 etc, then akak+1^k cannot be greater than a1a2....akak+1 simply because akak+1^k has the exact same amount of digits as a1a2.....akak+1, but since a1 is (by transitive property) greater than or equal to ak+1, then the inequality must be false (it can be equal to, but not greater than. If it was simply equal to, it would be a formula, not an inequality, so therefore, that one step does not connect with the previous one)

    Other than that, the logic is fine, but since most of the problem only works ASSUMING that the sequence is decreasing, which the problem does not state. If you want to state that the sequence is decreasing, then you would need to prove it somehow. Also, if the sequence is decreasing, then that last chain of logic does not work, as stated above.

    On the other hand, I'm not sure how to actually solve it, but I think I'm quite right in noticing the flaw(s) in your logic. I would like to see the actual answer to the problem, please reply!

    Oh, by the way, the above Mathematical Induction Problem is hardly Pre-Algebra to Algebra level. I don't even recall doing anything this hard when I did pre-calculus in high school. It should probably be moved to "University Math". Its also the reason why I joined, as I couldn't help but see the flaw, and I felt a need to correct it. I would really like to see a final result though, as I'm not quite sure how to go about solving it either.
    .
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  11. #11
    Newbie
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by tonio View Post
    Originally Posted by MathematicalInduction View Post
    Just to note, the above answer does not work. I'm not sure how to exactly solve it, but if you follow the above string of logic, it doesn't work for 2 reasons.
    A) You state that "if we assume the sequence decreases" there is nothing in the original problem that says the sequence decreases, only that all numbers of a are greater than 0. they could all be positive and be completely random. It does not make a difference.


    I couldn't see anywhere in his proof "assuming". He just arranged the terms of the sequence in decreasing order which can always be done in a finite set of real numbers.

    In fact his proof is a rather standard one to prove the means inequality.

    Tonio


    b) second of all, if one assumes that a1 is greater than a2 which is greater than a3 etc, then akak+1^k cannot be greater than a1a2....akak+1 simply because akak+1^k has the exact same amount of digits as a1a2.....akak+1, but since a1 is (by transitive property) greater than or equal to ak+1, then the inequality must be false (it can be equal to, but not greater than. If it was simply equal to, it would be a formula, not an inequality, so therefore, that one step does not connect with the previous one)

    Other than that, the logic is fine, but since most of the problem only works ASSUMING that the sequence is decreasing, which the problem does not state. If you want to state that the sequence is decreasing, then you would need to prove it somehow. Also, if the sequence is decreasing, then that last chain of logic does not work, as stated above.

    On the other hand, I'm not sure how to actually solve it, but I think I'm quite right in noticing the flaw(s) in your logic. I would like to see the actual answer to the problem, please reply!

    Oh, by the way, the above Mathematical Induction Problem is hardly Pre-Algebra to Algebra level. I don't even recall doing anything this hard when I did pre-calculus in high school. It should probably be moved to "University Math". Its also the reason why I joined, as I couldn't help but see the flaw, and I felt a need to correct it. I would really like to see a final result though, as I'm not quite sure how to go about solving it either..
    yeah, i understood that. I after he cleared it up. i just don't understand the steps i highlighted above, as im getting the exact opposite answer that I should be getting. anybody want to explain the exact logic between those 2 steps to me? thanks.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  12. #12
    Super Member
    Joined
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by Rel View Post
    Using mathematical induction
    proof this formula.

    the formula is attached the jpg files
    [Sorry I hard to using type that formula so I captured that

    Please help.T_T

    First show by induction if  a_1 a_2 ... a_n = 1 ~ a_i > 0 then  a_1 + a_2 + ... + a_n \geq n

    When  n = 1 it is true by checking actually  a_1 = 1 \geq 1

    Assume it is true for  a_1 ... a_k = 1 ~ \implies a_1 + ... + a_k \geq k

    When  n=k+1


    Among these  k+1 numbers , let's choose  max\{\ a_i \}\ and  min\{\ a_i \}\ wlog let them be  a_k and  a_{k+1} respectvely and we have  a_k \geq 1 and  a_{k+1} \leq 1

    then  (a_k - 1 ) (a_{k+1} - 1 ) \leq 0

     \boxed{ a_k + a_{k+1} \geq 1 + a_k a_{k+1} }



    Then we have for  a_1 ... a_{k-1} (a_k a_{k+1} )= 1

     a_1 + a_2 + ... + a_{k-1 } + (a_k a_{k+1}) \geq k (by asumption )

    Thus

     a_1 + a_2 + ... + a_{k-1} + (a_k + a_{k+1}) \geq  a_1 + a_2 + ... + a_{k-1}  + (1 +  a_k a_{k+1})

     = (a_1 + a_2 + ... + a_{k-1} + a_k a_{k+1} )+ 1 \geq k +1

    Then let  a_i = \frac{b_i}{B} then we have

     b_1 b_2 ... b_n = B^n implies

     \frac{b_1 + b_2 + ... + b_n}{B} \geq n

     \frac{b_1 + b_2 + ... + b_n}{n} \geq B = \sqrt[n]{ b_1 b_2 ... b_n }

    QED
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  13. #13
    MHF Contributor
    Joined
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,120
    Thanks
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Archie Meade View Post
    Thanks tonio,

    starting from scratch,
    we can apply a few manipulations for convenience...

    If the following is true

    \frac{A_1+A_2+......+A_n}{n}\ \ge\ \sqrt[n]{A_1A_2....A_n}

    we attempt to prove that it causes

    \frac{A_1+A_2+....+A_n+A_{n+1}}{n+1}\ \ge\ \sqrt[n+1]{A_1A_2....A_nA_{n+1}}

    to be true.

    Rewriting a_i=\sqrt[n]{A_i} for i=1,2,....,n

    here we use \color{blue}\sqrt{ab}=\sqrt{a}\sqrt{b}

    we try to prove

    {a_1}^k+{a_2}^k+....+{a_k}^k\ \ge\ ka_1a_2....a_k

    by showing that it causes

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+...{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}^{  k+1}\ \ge\ (k+1)a_1a_2....a_ka_{k+1}

    Proof

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....+{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}  ^{k+1}=\color{red}a_1\color{black}{a_1}^k+a_2{a_2}  ^k+....+a_k{a_k}^k+\color{blue}a_{k+1}\color{black  }{a_{k+1}}^k

    To develop the inequality, the following may be utilised...

    x_1\ \ge\ x_2,\ y_1\ \ge\ y_2\ \Rightarrow\ x_1y_1+x_2y_2\ \ge\ x_1y_2+x_2y_1

    This is because

    x_1y_1+x_2y_2-(x_1y_2+x_2y_1)=x_1(y_1-y_2)-x_2(y_1-y_2)=(x_1-x_2)(y_1-y_2)\ \ge\ 0

    Hence, if the terms are arranged in decreasing order...as it makes no difference to the outcome, but easier to write a proof

    a_1\ \ge\ a_2\ \ge\ a_3\ \ge.....\ge\ a_k\ \ge\ a_{k+1}

    \color{red}a_1\color{black}{a_1}^k+a_2{a_2}^k+....  +a_k\color{black}{a_k}^k+\color{blue}a_{k+1}\color  {black}{a_{k+1}}^k\ \ge\ \color{blue}a_{k+1}\color{black}{a_1}^k+a_2{a_2}^k  +....+a_{k}\color{black}{a_k}^k+\color{red}a_1\col  or{black}{a_{k+1}}^k

    as a_1{a_1}^k\ \ge\ a_{k+1}{a_{k+1}}^k

    Now use the \color{blue}a_{k+1} factors in the last term

    Therefore

    a_1{a_1}^k+a_2{a_2}^k+...+a_k{a_k}^k+a_{k+1}{a_{k+  1}}^{k}\ \ge\ a_{k+1}{a_1}^k+a_2{a_2}^k+....\color{red}a_{k+1}\c  olor{black}{a_k}^k+a_1\color{red}a_k\color{black}{  a_{k+1}}^{k-1}

    terms in red interchanged, maintaining the inequality

    \ge\ a_{k+1}{a_1}^k+a_2{a_2}^k+...+a_{k+1}{a_{k-1}}^k+a_{k+1}{a_k}^k+a_1a_{k-1}a_k{a_{k+1}}^{k-2}

    Hence, continuing this on for all terms of the RHS

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}^  {k+1}\ \ge\ a_{k+1}({a_1}^k+{a_2}^k+...+{a_k}^k)+a_1a_2a_3....  a_ka_{k+1}

    Then

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}^  {k+1}\ \ge\ [a_{k+1}]\left[({a_1}^k+{a_2}^k+...+{a_k}^k)+a_1a_2...a_k\right]

    If the original statement is true, {a_1}^k+{a_1}^k+...+{a_k}^k\ \ge\ ka_1a_2...a_k

    then

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....+{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}  ^{k+1}\ \ge\ a_{k+1}[(ka_1a_2...a_k)+a_1a_2...a_k]

    {a_1}^{k+1}+{a_2}^{k+1}+....+{a_k}^{k+1}+{a_{k+1}}  ^{k+1}\ \ge\ (k+1)(a_1a_2....a_{k+1})
    I owe you a sincere apology, as there was a typing error
    and the line you questioned was mathematically incorrect,
    though the logic behind the proof was correct.

    Thank you for pointing it out and to Tonio and simplependulum for their input.
    Last edited by Archie Meade; June 8th 2010 at 03:14 AM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  14. #14
    Newbie
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4
    no problem. and thanks for solving it. it makes sense now.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  15. #15
    Member
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    78
    An easier way is to prove the n=2^k case by induction, and then for an arbitrary n, pad a[i] up to a power of 2 by the AM of a[1] to a[n]
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. [SOLVED] mathematical induction problem
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: June 7th 2011, 06:04 AM
  2. Mathematical Induction problem
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: April 6th 2011, 12:52 PM
  3. Mathematical Induction Problem!
    Posted in the Algebra Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 15th 2010, 06:06 PM
  4. Mathematical Induction Problem
    Posted in the Calculus Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: September 15th 2009, 06:38 PM
  5. mathematical induction problem no.2
    Posted in the Pre-Calculus Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: January 12th 2008, 08:45 PM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum