Mathematical Induction: Mary Barnes Sue Gordon
Mathematical Induction: Mary Barnes Sue Gordon
Mathematical Induction: Mary Barnes Sue Gordon
Mathematical Induction
Mary Barnes
Sue Gordon
1987
c University of Sydney
Contents
1 Mathematical Induction 1
1.1 Why do we need proof by induction? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 What is proof by induction? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 The Binomial Theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.4 Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.5 Finding the formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.6 Further exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2 Solutions to Exercises 11
Mathematics Learning Centre, University of Sydney 1
1 Mathematical Induction
Mathematical Induction is a powerful and elegant technique for proving certain types of
mathematical statements: general propositions which assert that something is true for all
positive integers or for all positive integers from some point on.
Let us look at some examples of the type of result that can be proved by induction.
Proposition 1. The sum of the first n positive integers (1, 2, 3, . . .) is 12 n(n + 1).
Note, we give an example of a convex polygon together with one that is not convex in
Figure 1.
A polygon is said to be convex if any line joining two vertices lies within the polygon or
on its boundary.
By a diagonal, we mean a line joining any two non-adjacent vertices.
As you see, the subject matter of the statements can vary widely. It can include algebra,
geometry and many other topics. What is common to all the examples is the number n
that appears in the statement. In all cases it is either stated, or implicitly assumed, that
n can be any positive integer.
Let’s do this with Proposition 1. The results are recorded in the following table.
Mathematics Learning Centre, University of Sydney 2
n 1 2 3 4
sum of first 1 1+2=3 1 + 2 + 3 = 6 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 10
n numbers
1
2
n(n + 1) 1
2
×1×2=1 1
2
×2×3=3 1
2
×3×4=6 1
2
× 4 × 5 = 10
You may find this quite convincing and wonder whether any further proof is needed. If
a statement is true for all numbers we have tested, can we conclude that it is true for all
values of n?
Proposition 3. If p is any prime number, 2p − 1 is also a prime. Let us try some special
cases here too.
p 2 3 5 7
2p − 1 3 7 31 127
Since 3, 7, 31, 127 are all primes, we may be satisfied the result is always true. But if we
try the next prime, 11, we find that
Let us turn again to Proposition 1, and ask how many cases we would need to check,
before we could say for certain that it is true. Imagine getting a computer on the job and
setting it the task. No matter how many values of n we found the proposition to be true
for, we could never be sure that there was not an ever bigger value for which it was false.
This explains the need for a general proof which covers all values of n. Mathematical
induction is one way of doing this.
Inductive step
Prove that if the proposition is true for n = k, then it must also be true for n = k + 1.
This step is the difficult part, and it may help you if we break it up into several stages.
Stage 1 Write down what the proposition asserts for the case n = k. This is what you
are going to assume. It is often called the inductive hypothesis.
Stage 2 Write down what the proposition asserts for the case n = k + 1. This is what
you have to prove. Keep this clearly in mind as you go.
Stage 3 Prove the statement in Stage 2, using the assumption in Stage 1. We can’t give
you any recipe for how to do this. It varies from problem to problem, depending on the
mathematical content. You have to use your ingenuity, common sense and knowledge of
mathematics here. The question to ask is “how can I get from Stage 1 to Stage 2?”
Once the initial and the inductive step have been carried out, we can conclude immediately
that the proposition is true for all n ≥ 1 (or for all n ≥ a if we started at n = a.)
Because we have proved the inductive step, this process will never come to an end.
We could set the “machine” running, and it would keep going forever, eventually reaching
any n, no matter how big it may be.
Suppose there was a number N for which the statement was false. Then when we get to
the number N − 1, we would have the following situation:
This contradicts the inductive step, so it cannot possible happen. Hence the statement
must be true for all positive integers n.
If you are familiar with computer programming, it may be helpful for you to compare
this argument with a looping process, in which a computation is carried out, an indexing
variable is advanced by one, and the computation is repeated.
The two processes have much in common. In a computer program you must begin by
setting the initial value of your variables (this is analogous to our initial step). Then you
must set up the loop, calling on the previous values of your variables to calculate new
values (this is analogous to our inductive step).
Mathematics Learning Centre, University of Sydney 4
There is one other thing necessary in a computer program: you must set up a “stop”
condition otherwise your program will run forever. That has no analogy in our process –
our theoretical machine will run forever! That is why we can be certain our result is true
for all positive integers.
Inductive step:
Stage 1: Our assumption (the inductive hypothesis) asserts that
1
1 + 2 + 3 + · · · + k = k(k + 1).
2
Initial step: If n = 4, the polygon is a quadrilateral, which has two diagonals as shown
in Figure 2.
Inductive step:
Stage 1: The inductive hypothesis asserts that the number of diagonals of a polygon
with k vertices is 12 k(k − 3).
The answer here is to “add another vertex”. Let’s do this and see if we can count how
many additional diagonals can be drawn as a result. Figure 3 will help here.
Pk+1
Pk Pk
P1 P1
Pk-1 P
k-1
P2 P2
P3 P3
P4 P4
When we add an extra vertex to a polygon with n vertices, all the lines which were
diagonals of the original polygon will still be diagonals of the new one. The inductive
Mathematics Learning Centre, University of Sydney 6
hypothesis says that there are 12 k(k − 3) existing diagonals. In addition, new diagonals
can be drawn from the extra vertex Pk+1 to all other vertices except the two adjoining it
(P1 and Pk ) giving us k − 2 extra diagonals. Finally, the line joining P1 and Pk , which
used to be a side of the polygon, is now a diagonal.
This completes the inductive step. Hence the result is true for all n ≥ 4.
At this point, it would be a good idea to go back and read over the explanation of the
process of mathematical induction thinking about the general explanation in the light of
the two examples we have just completed.
Next, we illustrate this process again, by using mathematical induction to give a proof of
an important result, which is frequently used in algebra, calculus, probability and other
topics.
For example,
but if you are not familiar with this notation, use equation (1).
Initial step: Let n = 1. Then the left hand side of (1) is (x + a)1 and the right hand
side of (1) is x1 + a1 which both equal x + a.
Mathematics Learning Centre, University of Sydney 7
Inductive step:
Step 1: Assume the theorem is true for n = k, ie that
k(k − 1) k−2 2
(x + a)k = xk + kxk−1 a + x a + · · · + kxak−1 + ak .
2!
(k + 1)(k) k−1 2
(x + a)k+1 = xk+1 + (k + 1)xk a + x a + · · · + (k + 1)xak + ak+1 . (2)
2!
(k + 1)(k) k−1 2
(adding) = xk+1 + (k + 1)xk a + x a + · · · + (k + 1)xak + ak+1 .
2!
This is the right hand side as required. Hence the result is true for all n ≥ 1.
Now try some of the exercises for yourself.
1.4 Exercises
4. For all n ≥ 1,
xn+1 − 1
= 1 + x + x2 + · · · + x n where x = 1.
x−1
5. For all n ≥ 1, (1 + x)n ≥ 1 + nx where x is any real number greater than −1.
6. For all ≥ 1,
n
1
r(r + 1) = n(n + 1)(n + 2).
r=1 3
ie,
1
1(2) + 2(3) + 3(4) + · · · + n(n + 1) = n(n + 1)(n + 2).
3
7. For all n ≥ 3, n2 ≥ 2n + 1.
8. For all n ≥ 4, 2n ≥ n2 .
(Hint: Use the previous exercise to help you in the inductive step.)
9. For all n ≥ 3, the sum of the interior angles of a polygon with n vertices is 180(n−2)◦ .
The problems in the exercises were stated in a form which made it clear that mathematical
induction could be used to prove the results: they nearly all began with the words “for
all n ≥ . . .”. Sometimes you will have a more open-ended question to answer, such as the
following.
Exercise
What is the maximum numbeer of regions into which a plane can be divided by n straight
lines?
In this case, we have to analyse the problem carefully, step by step, looking for a pattern,
and then use that pattern as the basis for a proof by induction. Try this yourself, before
reading the solution.
Solution
First of all, if two of the lines were parallel, by moving one so that they were no longer
parallel, we could increase the number of regions. This is illustrated in Figure 4.
Mathematics Learning Centre, University of Sydney 9
3 regions 4 regions
Secondly, if 3 of the lines were concurrent, we could increase the number of regions by
moving one so that they were no longer concurrent. This is illustrated in Figure 5.
6 regions 7 regions
Hence, we conclude that, to get the maximum number of regions, none of the lines can
be parallel, and no 3 can be concurrent. We can now work out the first few cases which
are illustrated in Figure 6.
There is no obvious pattern in this, so we need to analyse more carefully what is going
on. What happens when we add an extra line?
When we added the third line, it cut each of the other lines at a distinct point. The new
line thus passed through three of the existing regions, dividing each in two and creating
3 new regions.
When we added the fourth line, it cut each of the others at a distinct point, and passed
through 4 of the existing regions, creating 4 new regions.
Mathematics Learning Centre, University of Sydney 10
And so on . . ..
When we add an nth line, it will cut through each of the existing (n − 1) lines at a distinct
point, and will pass through n of the existing regions creating n additional regions.
Not only have we obtained an answer to the question, we also have worked out how
to progress from one step to the next, and so we have the basis for a formal proof by
induction.
1. Write out a formal proof by mathematical induction that the maximum number of
regions the plane is divided into by n lines is 12 (n2 + n + 2).
2 Solutions to Exercises
Solutions to exercises
Remember there may be may different ways of presenting a solution. The working given
is just one way.
Initial step: The first odd number is 1 which is 2(1) − 1 so the assertion is true for
n = 1.
Inductive step:
Stage 1: The inductive hypothesis asserts that the nth odd number is 2n − 1.
Inductive step:
Stage 1: The inductive hypothesis asserts that
1 + 3 + 5 + · · · + (2n − 1) = n2 .
Stage 2: We want to prove that the sum of the first (n + 1) odd numbers is (n + 1)2 .
Inductive Step:
Assume that for n = k, k(k + 1) is even. If a number is even, it is a multiple of 2.
So, we can assume that k(k + 1) = k 2 + k = 2m for some integer m.
Now
(k + 1)[(k + 1) + 1] = (k + 1)(k + 2)
= k 2 + k + 2k + 2
= 2m + 2k + 2 using the inductive hypothesis
= 2(m + k + 1) which is even as required.
Hence the result is true for all n ≥ 1.
Inductive step:
The inductive hypothesis asserts that n3 − n is a multiple of 6, so let n3 − n = 6m
for some integer m. We want to prove that (n + 1)3 − (n + 1) is a multiple of 6.
(n + 1)3 − (n + 1) = n3 + 3n2 + 3n + 1 − n − 1
= (n3 − n) + (3n2 + 3n) rearranging the previous line
= 6m + 3n(n + 1) using the inductive hypothesis
= 6m + 3 × 2l we proved n(n + 1) even in 3(a)
= 6(m + l) which is divisible by 6.
The result is therefore true for all n ≥ 2.
4. For all n ≥ 1,
xn+1 − 1
= 1 + x + x2 + · · · + x n where x = 1. (1)
x−1
(The reason why x must not equal 1 is to avoid dividing by zero and has nothing to
do with the inductive process.)
x2 − 1 (x + 1)(x − 1)
= = x + 1, x = 1.
x−1 x−1
Mathematics Learning Centre, University of Sydney 13
Inductive step:
We assume the proposition is true for n = k, ie
xk+1 − 1
= 1 + x + x2 + · · · + x k x = 1.
x−1
5. For all n ≥ 1, (1 + x)n ≥ 1 + nx, where x is any real number greater than −1. Note
this means that (1 + x) > 0.
Initial step: For n = 1, (1+x)1 = 1+x and 1+nx = 1+x, so (1+x)n = 1+nx ≥ 1+nx
is true for n = 1.
Inductive step:
We assume that the proposition is true for n = k. That is, (1 + x)k ≥ 1 + kx, when
x ≥ −1.
6. For all n ≥ 1,
n
1
r(r + 1) = n(n + 1)(n + 2).
r=1 3
That is,
1
1(2) + 2(3) + · · · + n(n + 1) = n(n + 1)(n + 2).
3
Initial step: For n = 1, the left hand side is 1(2) = 2 and the right hand side is
1
3
1(2)(3) = 2, so the assertion is true for n = 1.
Inductive step:
Assume that
1
1(2) + 2(3) + · · · + k(k + 1) = k(k + 1)(k + 2).
3
1
1(2) + 2(3) + · · · + k(k + 1) + (k + 1)(k + 2) = (k + 1)(k + 2)(k + 3).
3
7. For all n ≥ 3, n2 ≥ 2n + 1.
Inductive step:
Assume k 2 ≥ 2k + 1.
We want to prove that (k + 1)2 ≥ 2(k + 1) + 1.
Now, starting with the left hand side
(k + 1)2 = k 2 + 2k + 1
≥ (2k + 1) + 2k + 1 using inductive hypothesis
= 2(k + 1) + 2k
≥ 2(k + 1) + 1 since 2k ≥ 1 for k ≥ 1.
This is the right hand side.
Thus the result is true for all n ≥ 3.
Mathematics Learning Centre, University of Sydney 15
8. For all n ≥ 4, 2n ≥ n2 .
Inductive step:
Assume that 2k ≥ k 2 .
9. For n ≥ 3, the sum of the interior angles of a polygon with n vertices is 180(n − 2)◦ .
Initial step: For n = 3, the polygon is a triangle and the sum of the angles of a
triangle is 180◦ which is 180(3 − 2)◦ , as required.
Inductive step:
Assume that the sum of the interior angles of a polygon with k vertices is 180(k − 2)◦ .
We want to prove that if a polygon has k + 1 vertices, the sum of its interior angles
is 180(k − 1)◦ .
Pk+1
Pk
P1
Pk-1
P2
P3
P4
Let us join the first and k th vertex in the polygon with k+1 vertices shown in Figure 7.
This divides the polygon into a triangle (P1 Pk Pk+1 ) and a polygon with k vertices.
The sum of the interior angles of the polygon so formed is 180(k−2)◦ , by our inductive
hypothesis, and the sum of the angles of the triangle is 180◦ .
10. The number of non-empty subsets of a set of n elements is 2n − 1, for any positive
integer n.
Initial step: If a set has one element in it then the only non-empty subset is the set
itself. Thus there is one non-empty subset and 21 − 1 = 1, so the assertion is true for
n = 1.
Inductive step:
Assume that if a set has k elements, then it has 2k − 1 non-empty subsets.
We want to prove that if a set has k + 1 elements, it has 2k+1 − 1 non-empty subsets.
Let us suppose the set has k elements in it plus a new element we will denote by p as
shown in Figure 8.
c
a
d
b
Now the number of non-empty subsets that can be formed that do not contain p is
2k − 1 by the inductive hypothesis.
We can adjoin the element p to each of these subsets to form 2k − 1 new subsets.
Finally there is one subset whose only element is p.
Hence the total number of subsets is
(2k − 1) + (2k − 1) + 1 = 2(2k ) − 1
= 2k+1 − 1 as required.
Initial step: If n = 1, the plane is divided into 2 regions and 12 (12 + 1 + 2) = 2, so the
assertion is true for n = 1.
Inductive step:
1
Now suppose we have n lines and 2
(n2 + n + 2) regions. (This is the inductive
hypothesis.)
Add one more line, which meets the existing lines at n distinct points. These n points
subdivide the new line into n + 1 segments. Each segment divides one of the existing
regions into two, so the number of regions is increased by n + 1.
2. (Hint) If there are only 2 scientists, there will be only one handshake. If one more
arrives, he or she will shake hands with both of the others, making 3 handshakes in
all.
Now imagine there are n people in the room, and one more arrives and shakes hands
with all the others. There will be n additional handshakes.