Author: Santiago Salazar

Problems I: Mathematical Statements and Proofs

1.

By using truth tables prove that, for all statements and , the statement
and its contrapositive ( ) are equivalent. In example
1.2.3 identify which statement is the contrapositive of statement (i) ( = 0
> 0). Find another pair of statements in that list that are the contrapositives of
each other.
Truth table

~ ~ ~ ~

Since the last two columns are identical, the statements and its
contrapositive ~ ~ are logically equivalent.
The contrapositive of statement (i) ( = 0 > 0) is statement (vii)
( 0 () 0). Similarly, the contrapositive of statement (iii) ( = 0
0) is statement (vi) ( > 0 () 0).

2. By using truth tables prove that, for all statements and , the three statements
(i) , (ii) ( ) , and (iii) ( ) are equivalent.
Truth table
( ) ( )

Since the last three columns are identical, the statements , ( )

, and ( ) are logically equivalent.
3. Prove that the three basic connectives or, and, and not can all be written in
terms of the single connective notand where is interpreted as
( ).

~( ) ~

Since the last two columns are identical, the statements ~ and ~( ) are
logically equivalent. Hence we can write ~ as .
~( ) ~[~ ]

Since columns 3 and 5 are identical, the statements and

~ ~ are logically equivalent. But observe that, by definition,
~ is written as . Thus ~ ~ is logically
equivalent to ~ . Then, by the first part of the problem,
~ can be written as . Hence
we can write as .
~ ~ ~ ~ ~(~ ~)

Since columns 3 and 7 are identical, the statements and ~(~ ~)

are logically equivalent. But observe that, by the first part of the problem,
~ ~ is logically equivalent to ( ). Now,
by definition, the negation of this last statement, namely ~(~ ~), can be
written as ( ). Thus we can write as
( ).
4. Prove the following statements concerning the positive integers , , and .
(i) ( divides ) and ( divides ) divides ( + ).
(ii) ( divides ) or ( divides ) divides .
(i) divides means = for some integer , and divides means =
for some integer . Thus + = + = + = , where = + is
an integer. Therefore divides ( + ).
(ii) case 1: divides means = for some integer . Thus = =
= , where = is an integer. Therefore divides .
case 2: divides means = for some integer . Thus = =
= , where = is an integer. Therefore divides .
Hence, in either case, divides .
5.

Which of the following conditions are necessary for the positive integer to be
divisible by 6 (proofs not necessary)?
(i) 3 divides .
(ii) 9 divides .
(iii) 12 divides .
(iv) = 12.
(v) 6 divides 2 .
(vi) 2 divides and 3 divides .
(vii) 2 divides or 3 divides .
Which of these conditions are sufficient?

6 divides means = 6 for some integer . The following conditions are

necessary for the positive integer to be divisible by 6: (i) 3 divides , (v) 6
divides 2 , (vi) 2 divides and 3 divides , and (vii) 2 divides or 3 divides .
The following conditions are sufficient for the positive integer to be divisible
by 6: (iii) 12 divides , (iv) = 12, (v) 6 divides 2 , and (vi) 2 divides and 3
divides .
6. Use the properties of addition and multiplication of real numbers given in
Properties 2.3.1 to deduce that, for all real numbers and ,
(i) 0 = 0 = 0 ,
(ii) = = ,
(iii) = .
(i) Prove that 0 = 0 = 0 .
0+0=0
0 + (0 ) = 0
0 =0
0=0
Thus 0 = 0 = 0 .

Additive identity (iv)

Distributive property (iii)
Additive inverse (vi)
Commutative property (i)

(ii) Prove that = = ().

First we show that = (1) by showing that + 1 = 0.
+ 1 = 1 + (1)
Multiplicative Identity (v)
= (1 + (1))
Distributive property (iii)
= 0
Since 1 is the additive inverse of 1
=0
By part (i) of problem
Thus + 1 = 0 = (1). Then
= (1)
By the proof above
= ((1))
Associative property (ii)
= ()
By the proof above
= (1)
By the proof above
= ((1))
Associative property (ii)
= ()
By the proof above
= ()
Commutative property (i)
Thus = = ().
(iii) Prove that = .
+ = 0
= ()
=
=
=
=
= ()()

= ()()
Additive Identity (iv)
Since = ()
By part (ii) of problem
By part (ii) of problem
Commutative property (i)

By part (ii) of problem

Commutative property (i)

Thus = .
7. Prove by contradiction the following statement concerning an integer .
2 is even is even.
[You may suppose that an integer is odd if and only if = 2 + 1 for some
integer . This is proved later as Proposition 11.3.4.]
Suppose is not even. Then is odd, that is = 2 + 1 for some integer . Thus
2 = (2 + 1)2 = 4 2 + 4 + 1 = 2 2 2 + 2 + 1 = 2 + 1 where = 2 2 +
2 is an integer. Thus 2 is odd contradicting that 2 is even. It follows that our
initial assumption, that is odd, is false. Hence is even as required. Therefore,
2 is even is even.
8. Prove the following statements concerning a real number .
(i) 2 2 = 0 = 1 or = 2.
(ii) 2 2 > 0 < 1 or > 2.
(i) : 2 2 = 0 2 + 1 = 0
( 2) = 0 or ( + 1) = 0
= 2 or = 1
Thus 2 2 = 0 = 1 or = 2.
: If = 2, then 2 2 = 22 2 2 = 0. If = 1, then 2 2 =
(1)2 1 2 = 0. So, in either case, 2 2 = 0. Thus ( = 1 or = 2)
2 2 = 0.
Hence 2 2 = 0 = 1 or = 2.
(ii) : 2 2 > 0 2 + 1 > 0
( 2 > 0 and + 1 > 0) or ( 2 < 0 and + 1 < 0)
( > 2 and > 1) or ( < 2 and < 1)
> 2 or < 1
2
Thus 2 > 0 < 1 or > 2.
:
case1: > 2 2 > 4 > 2 (multiply by 2 > 0) 2 > 2 and > 2 2 >
2 > 2 (multiply by > 0) 2 > 2. It follows that 2 > 2 = > 2
and so 2 > 2 2 2 > 0 as required.
case2: < 1 0 < 1 0 < 2 < 1 (by adding 2) 0 < 1 and
< 1 > 1 (multiply by 1 < 0) and < 1 2 > > 1 (multiply
by < 0) 2 > 1 2 > 1 > 0 2 2 > 1 2 = 1
> 0 2 2 > 0 as required.
Hence 2 2 > 0 < 1 or > 2.
9. Prove by contradiction that there does not exist a largest integer.

[Hint: Observe that for any integer there is a greater one, say + 1. So begin
your proof
Suppose for contradiction that there is a largest integer. Let this larger integer
be .
Suppose for contradiction that there is a largest integer . Observe that
0 < 1 < + 1. Thus is not the largest integer, since for all , + 1 > .
10. What is wrong with the following proof that 1 is the largest integer?
Let be the largest integer. Then, since 1 is an integer we must have 1 . On
the other hand, since 2 is also an integer we must have 2 from which it
follows that 1. Thus, since 1 and 1 we must have = 1. Thus 1 is
the largest integer as claimed.
What does this argument prove?
The proof starts with a statement which is false (from problem 9). We also know
that the conclusion is false since 1 is not the largest integer. However all the
implications that start with a false hypothesis are true. In fact, this argument
proves that if a largest integer existed, it would be 1.
11. Prove by contradiction that there does not exist a smallest positive real number.
Suppose for contradiction that is the smallest positive real number. Observe
1
2

1
2

1
2

that 0 < < 1 0 < < . Thus the number is positive, real, and less than
, contradicting our initial assumption that was the smallest positive real
number. Hence there does not exist a smallest positive real number.
12. Prove by induction on that, for all positive integers , 3 divides 4 + 5.
3 divides 4 + 5 means 4 + 5 = 3 for some integer .
Base case: For = 1, 4 + 5 = 41 + 5 = 9 which is divisible by 3 as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that, for some positive
integer , 3 divides 4 + 5, that is 4 + 5 = 3 for some integer . We need to
show that 3 divides 4+1 + 5, that is 4+1 + 5 = 3 for some integer . Then
4+1 + 5 = 4 4 + 5 (by inductive definition) = 4 3 5 + 5 (by inductive
hypothesis) = 12 15 = 3 4 5 = 3, where = 4 5 is an integer.
Thus 3 divides 4+1 + 5 as required.
Conclusion: Hence, by induction on , 3 divides 4 + 5 for all positive integers .
13. Prove by induction on that ! > 2 for all integers such that 4.
Base case: For = 4, ! = 4! = 24 > 16 = 24 = 2 as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that ! > 2 for some
positive integer 4. We need to show that + 1 ! > 2+1 . Then 2! >

2 2 = 2+1 (by inductive hypothesis) and + 1 ! = ( + 1)! (by inductive

definition) 4 + 1 ! = 5! (since 4) > 2! > 2 2 = 2+1 (by inductive
hypothesis). Thus + 1 ! > 2+1 as required.
Conclusion: Hence, by induction on , ! > 2 for all integers 4.
14. Prove Bernoullis inequality
(1 + ) 1 +
for all non-negative integers and real numbers > 1.
Base case: For = 0, 1 + 0 = 1 1 = 1 + 0 and so the equality holds.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that (1 + ) 1 + for
some non-negative integer and real numbers > 1. We need to show that
(1 + )+1 1 + ( + 1). Observe that > 1 1 + > 0, and that 0
and 2 0 (since for any real number , 2 0) both imply that 2 0. Thus
(1 + )+1 = (1 + )(1 + ) (by inductive definition). By inductive hypothesis,
(1 + ) 1 + 1 + 1 + = (1 + )+1 1 + (1 + ) = 1 +
+ + 2 = 1 + + 1 + 2 (multiply by 1 + > 0) 1 + + 1 +
0 = 1 + + 1 (since 2 0). Therefore (1 + )+1 1 + ( + 1) as
required.
Conclusion: Hence, by induction on , (1 + ) 1 + for all non-negative
integers and real numbers > 1.
15. For which non-negative integer values of is ! 3 ?
! 3 is true for = 0 and all integers 7.
For = 0, ! = 0! = 1 by inductive definition, and 3 = 30 = 1, and so the
equality holds. Now we show that the inequality is also true for all integers
7.
Base case: For = 7, ! = 7! = 5040 and 3 = 37 = 2187; and so ! 3 .
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that ! 3 for some
integer 7. We need to show that + 1 ! 3+1 . Then 3! 3 3 = 3+1
and + 1 ! = ( + 1)! (by inductive definition) 7 + 1 ! = 8! (since
7) 3! 3 3 = 3+1 (by inductive hypothesis). Thus + 1 ! 3+1 as
required.
Conclusion: Hence, by induction on , ! 3 for all integers 7.
16. Prove by induction on that

=1

=
,
( + 1) + 1

for all positive integers .

Base case: For = 1,

=1

1
1
1
=
=
( + 1) 1(1 + 1) 2

and

1
1
=
=
+1 1+1 2
as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that

=1

=
( + 1) + 1

for some positive integer . We need to show that

+1

=1

1
+1
+1
=
=
.
( + 1) ( + 1) + 1 + 2

But by inductive definition and inductive hypothesis

+1

=1

1
=
( + 1)

=1

1
1
+
( + 1)
+ 1 ( + 2)

1
+
+1
+ 1 ( + 2)
2
+ 2 + 1
=
+1 +2
+1 2
=
+1 +2
+1
=
+2
=

as required.
Conclusion: Hence, by induction on ,

=1

=
( + 1) + 1

for all positive integers .

17. For a positive integer the number is defined inductively by
1 = 1,
6 + 5
+1 =
+ 2
for a positive integer.
Prove by induction on that, for all positive integers, (i) > 0 and (ii) < 5.
(i) Base case: For = 1, = 1 = 1 > 0 as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that > 0 for some
positive integer . We need to show that
6 + 5
+1 =
> 0.
+ 2

By inductive hypothesis, > 0 + 2 > 0 and > 0 2 >

6 > 6 + 5 > + 2 > 0. Thus
6 + 5
6 + 5
>1>0
>0
+ 2
+ 2
as required.
Conclusion: Hence, by induction on , > 0 for all positive integers .
(ii) Base case: For = 1, = 1 = 1 < 5 as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that < 5 for some
positive integer . We need to show that
6 + 5
+1 =
< 5.
+ 2
By inductive hypothesis, < 5 6 < 5 + 5 6 + 5 < 5 + 10 =
5( + 2) 6 + 5 < 5( + 2). Thus
6 + 5
<5
+ 2
as required.
Conclusion: Hence, by induction on , < 5 for all positive integers .
18. Given a sequence of numbers 1 , 2 ,, the number
inductively by

=1 ()

is defined

a i = 1 , and
=1
+1

ii

=
=1

+ 1 for 1.

=1

Prove that

1+

2 1

=1

1 2
=
for 1.
1

What happens if = 1?
Base case: For = 1,
1

1 + 2

= 1 + 2

11

= 1 + 2 = 1 +

=1

and

1 2
1 2
(1 )(1 + )
=
=
=1+
1
1
1
as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that

1+
=1

2 1

1 2
=
1

for some integer 1 and for all real numbers 1. We need to show that

+1

+1

1+

2 1

=1

1 2
=
.
1

By inductive definition and inductive hypothesis,

+1

1+

2 1

1 + 2

=1

=1

as required.
Conclusion: Hence

1+

2 1

=1

1 + 2

+1 1

1 2

=
1 + 2
1
+1
1 2
=
1

1 2
=
1

for all integers 1 and for all real numbers 1. Moreover, if = 1, then the
formula does not work since 1 = 0 and we cannot divide by zero. However,
2

= 1 for all 1 and so

1 + 2

= 2 .

=1

19. Prove that

1
=2

1
+1
=
2

for integers 2.
Base case: For = 2,
2

1
=2

1
1
3
=1 2 =
2

2
4

and
+1 2+1 3
=
=
2
2(2) 4
as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that

1
=2

1
+1
=
2

for some integer 2. We need to show that

+1

1
=2

1
( + 1) + 1
+2
=
=
.
2

2( + 1)
2 + 2

By inductive definition and inductive hypothesis,

+1

=2

1
1 2

1
=2

1
2

1
( + 1)2

+1
1
=
1
2
( + 1)2
+1 +1 21
=
2 + 1 2
+1 2 1
=
2 + 1
2 + 2 + 1 1
=
2 + 1
+2
=
2 + 1
+2
=
2 + 2

as required.
Conclusion: Hence

1
=2

1
+1
=
2

for all integers 2.

20. Prove that, for a positive integer , a 2 2 square grid with any one square
removed can be covered using L-shaped tiles such as the one shown below.

Base case: For = 1, a 21 21 square with one square removed can be covered
by a single L-shaped tile.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that a 2 2 square grid
with any one square removed can be covered by L-shaped tiles. We need to
deduce that a 2+1 2+1 square grid with any one square removed can be
covered using L-shaped tiles. If we divide the 2+1 2+1 square grid in four
equal square grids (as shown in the figure below), we obtain four 2 2
square grids (observe that 2+1 2 = 2 ). Since the 2+1 2+1 square grid has
one square removed, this removed square must lie in one of the four 2 2
square grids (as shown by the shaded square in the corner of the figure below).
The other three 2 2 square grid are complete. Now from each of the
complete 2 2 square grids, remove the square that touches the center of the
original 2+1 2+1 square grid (as shown in the figure below). By induction
hypothesis, all four of the 2 2 square grids with one square removed can be
covered using L-shaped tiles. Then, with one more L-shaped tile, we can cover
the three squares touching the center of the original 2+1 2+1 square grid.

Thus we can cover the original 2+1 2+1 square grid with one square
removed using L-shaped tiles as required.
Conclusion: Hence, for a positive integer , a 2 2 square grid with any one
square removed can be covered using L-shaped tiles.
2+1
2
2+1
2
2

21. Suppose that is a real number such that + 1 is an integer. Prove by

induction on that + 1 is an integer for all positive integers .
[For the inductive step consider + 1 + 1 .]
Strong induction is used.
Base case: For = 1, + 1 = + 1 is an integer as required. Now
+ 1 2 = 2 + 1 2 + 2 is an integer since the square of an integer is an
integer and thus 2 + 1 2 is an integer (since for any integer , 2 is an
integer) proving the result for = 2.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that + 1 is an
integer for all positive integers for some integer 2. We need to show
that +1 + 1 +1 is an integer. By inductive hypothesis, + 1 +
1 is an integer since the product of two integers is an integer. But
1
1
1
1
+
+ = +1 + +1 + 1 + 1

1
1
and, by inductive hypothesis,
+1
is an integer. Thus +1 + 1 +1
must be an integer as required.
Conclusion: Hence, by induction on , + 1 is an integer for all positive
integers .
22. Prove that
1

=1

1/

=1

for positive integers and positive real numbers .

[it does not seem to be possible to give a direct proof of this result using
induction on . However it can be proved for = 2 for 0 by induction on
. The general result now follows by proving the converse of the usual inductive
step: if the result holds for = + 1, where is a positive integer, then it holds
for = .]

case 1: If all the terms of the sequence are equal, that is 1 = 2 = = ,

then
1

=1

1
= 1 = 1 = 1

1/

=1

which implies that

1

1/

=1

=1

as required.
case 2: If not all the terms of the sequence are equal. Clearly this case is only
possible when > 1, and it is proved by induction. First we prove the inequality
when = 2 for 1 and then, using this result, we deduce that the
inequality is true for all positive integers .
Base case: For = 1, = 2 = 21 = 2. So we have two terms, 1 and 2 , and
since they are not equal, we have
1 2
1 2 0
1 2 2 > 0
1 2 21 2 + 2 2 > 0
1 2 + 21 2 + 2 2 > 41 2
1 + 2 2 > 41 2
1 + 2 2
> 1 2
2
1 + 2
> 1 2
2
and so
1
2

1/2

=1

=1

as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that
1

1/

=1

=1

where = 2 , for some positive integer . We need to show that

1
2 +1

2 +1

1/2 +1

2 +1

=1

=1

Then by inductive hypothesis

1
2 +1

2 +1

=
=1

1 + 2 + + 2 +1
2 +1

1 1 + 2 + + 2 +1
2
2
1 1 + 2 + + 2
1 2 +1 + 2 +2 + + 2 +1
=
+
2
2
2
2
1 1 + 2 + + 2
2 +1 + 2 +2 + + 2 +1
=
+
2
2
2

2
1 2 2 + 2 2 +1 2 +2 2 +1

2
=

1 2 2 2

1 2 2 +1

2 +1

1 2 2 +1

2 +1 2 +2 2 +1

1/2 +1

2 +1

=1

as required. Hence, by induction on , the result is true for all positive integers
. Thus the inequality is true for the natural powers of 2, that is for =
2,4,8,16,
Now we proceed to prove the inequality for all positive integers . If is not
equal to some natural power of 2, then it is certainly less than some natural
power of 2, since the sequence 2,4,8,16, , 2 , is unbounded above. Therefore
let be some natural power of 2 that is greater than . Also let
1

=
=1

and expand our list of terms such that

+1 = +2 = = = .
Then
1 + 2 + +
=

1
2 + +
=

+11 1 + 2 + +
=

1 + 2 + + + 1 + 2 + +
=

1 + 2 + + +
=

1 + 2 + + + +1 + +
=

1 2 +1
=
and so

1 2

 1 2
1 2
1 2
1

=1

1/

=1

as required. Hence, by induction on , the inequality is true for all positive

integers and all positive real numbers .
23. For non-zero real numbers we may extend Definition 5.3.3 to a definition of
powers for all integers by defining = 1 for integers > 0. With
these definitions prove the laws of exponents for any non-zero real numbers
and and integers and :
(i) = ;
(ii) + = ;
(iii) = .
[Hint: Start from exercise 5.7.]
(i) First, we prove the result for the non-negative integers.
Base case: For = 0, = 1 = as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that = for
some non-negative integer . We need to show that +1 +1 = +1 . Then,
by inductive definition and inductive hypothesis, +1 +1 = =
= +1 as required to prove the result for = + 1.
Conclusion: Hence, by induction on , = for any non-zero real
numbers and and non-negative integers .
Now we prove the result for the non-positive integers by proving that
1 1
1

=


for all non-negative integers . Then, by the definition of , we can conclude
that the result is true for all the non-positive integers.
Base case: For = 0,
1 1
1
=1=

as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that
1 1
1

=


for some non-negative integer . We need to show that
1
1
1

=
.
+1 +1
+1
Then, by inductive definition and inductive hypothesis,
1
1
1
1
1
1

=
=
+1 +1

+1

as required to prove the result for = + 1.

Conclusion: Hence, by induction on ,
1 1
1
=

for any non-zero real numbers and and non-negative integers .
Therefore = for any non-zero real numbers and and any integer
.
(ii) First, we prove the result for the non-negative integers.
Base case: For = 0, + = = 0 = as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that + = for
some non-negative integer . We need to show that ++1 = +1 . Then, by
inductive definition and inductive hypothesis, ++1 = + = =
= +1 as required to prove the result for = + 1.
Conclusion: Hence, by induction on , + = for any non-zero real
number and non-negative integers and .
Now we prove the result for the non-positive integers by proving that
1
1
=

for all non-negative integers and . Then, by the definition of , we can
conclude that the result is true for all the non-positive integers.
Base case: For = 0,
1
1
1
1
= = 0=

as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that
1
1
=

for some non-negative integer . We need to show that
1
1
= +1 .

++1

Then, by inductive definition and inductive hypothesis,
1
1
1
1
1
= + = = = +1

++1

as required to prove the result for = + 1.
Conclusion: Hence, by induction on ,
1
1
=

for any non-zero real number and non-negative integers and .
Therefore + = for any non-zero real number and any integers and
.
(iii) First, we prove the result for the non-negative integers.
Base case: For = 0, = 1 = 0 = as required.

Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that = for some

non-negative integer . We need to show that +1 = +1 . Then, by
inductive definition and inductive hypothesis, +1 = =
= + (by part (ii) of the problem) = +1 as required to prove
the result for = + 1.
Conclusion: Hence, by induction on , = for any non-zero real
number and non-negative integers and .
Now we prove the result for the non-positive integers by proving that
1
1
=

for all non-negative integers . Then, by the definition of , we can conclude

that the result is true for all the non-positive integers.
Base case: For = 0,
1
1
1
= 1 = 0 =

as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that
1
1
=

for some non-negative integer . We need to show that

1
1
= +1 .

+1

Then, by inductive definition, inductive hypothesis, and part (ii) of the problem
1
1
1
1
1
=
= = + = +1

+1

as required to prove the result for = + 1.

Conclusion: Hence, by induction on ,
1
1
=

for any non-zero real number and non-negative integers and .

Therefore = for any non-zero real number and any integers and
.
24. Fibonaccis rabbit problem may be stated as follows:
How many pairs of rabbits will be produced in a year, beginning with a single
pair, if in every month each pair bears a new pair which become productive
from the second month on?
Assuming that no rabbits die, express the number after months as a Fibonacci
number and hence answer the problem. Using a calculator and the Binnet
formula (Proposition 5.4.3) find the number after three years.
The th Fibonacci number is given by the following formula:

=
5

where = 1 + 5 2 and = 1 5 2 and is the number of months.

Thus after one year (12 months) there are
12 12
12 =
= 144 rabbits
5
and after three years (36 months) there are
36 36
36 =
= 14930352 rabbits
5
25. Let be the th Fibonacci number (Definition 5.4.2). Prove, by induction on
(Without using the Binnet formula Proposition 5.4.3), that
+ = 1 + +1
for all positive integers and .
Deduce, again using induction on , that divides .
Strong induction is used.
Base case: For = 1, + = +1 = 1 1 + 2 = 1 + (since, by
the inductive definition of the Fibonacci sequence, 1 = 2 = 1). For = 2,
+ = +2 = 1 2 + 3 = 1 + 2 (since 3 = 1 + 2 = 1 + 1 =
2). Note that by the first case 1 = +1 . Then +2 = +1 +
2 = +1 + as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that + = 1 +
+1 for all positive integers for some positive integer 2. We need
to show that ++1 = 1 +1 + +2 . Then, by the inductive definition of
the Fibonacci sequence, ++1 = + + +1 and by inductive hypothesis
++1 = 1 + +1 + 1 1 +
= 1 + 1 + +1 +
= 1 +1 + +2
= 1 +1 + +2
as required.
Conclusion: Hence, by induction on , + = 1 + +1 for all positive
integers and .
divides means that = for some integer .
Base case: For = 1, = and so divides as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that there exists some
integer such that = for some positive integers and . We need to
show that +1 = for some integer . Observe that all the Fibonacci
numbers are integers since every number is the sum of the previous two
numbers, which in turn are integers. Then, by the first part of the problem and
by inductive hypothesis,
+1 = +
= 1 + +1
= 1 + +1

= 1 + +1
=
where = 1 + +1 is an integer and so divides +1 as required.
Conclusion: Hence, by induction on , divides for all positive integers
and .
26. Suppose that points on a circle are all joined in pairs. The points are positioned
so that no three joining lines are concurrent in the interior of the circle. Let
be the number of regions into which the interior of the circle is divided. Draw
diagrams to find for 6.
Prove that is given by the following formula.
= + 1,2 + 1,3 + 1,4
= 1 + 1 2 5 + 18 24.
The following are the drawings corresponding to 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , and 6 .

For 6 , it is not feasible to show that the center is not the intersection of three
lines since we are working with small diagrams. However note that the points
on the circle do not form a regular hexagon circumscribed about a circle for
otherwise we would obtain three lines concurrent at the center of the circle.
Thus there is another region (not visible in such diagram) at the center of the
figure.
Base case: For = 1, we can see that the interior of the circle is divided into one
region
and
= + 1,2 + 1,3 + 1,4 = 1 = 1 +
1 2 5 + 18 24 as required.
Inductive step: Suppose now as inductive hypothesis that = 1 +
1 2 5 + 18 24 for some positive integer . We need to show that
+1 = 1 + + 1 + 1 2 5 + 1 + 18 24. Then by definition,
+1 = + 1 + , 2 + , 3 + , 4
!
!
!
=+1+
+
+
2! 2 ! 3! 3 ! 4! 4 !
1
1
1
= +1+ 1 + 1 2 + 1 2 3
2
6
24
7
11 2
1 3
1 4
=1+ + +
12
24
12
24
2
3
14 + 11 2 +
=1+
24
+ 1 2 3 + 14
=1+
24
+ 1 + 1 2 5 + 1 + 18
=1+
24
as required to prove the result for = + 1.

Conclusion: Hence, by induction on , = 1 + 1 2 5 + 18 24 for

all positive integers .