A guide to Proof by Induction
Adapted from L. R. A. Casse, A Bridging Course in Mathematics, The Mathematics
Learning Centre, University of Adelaide, 1996.
Inductive reasoning is where we observe of a number of special cases and then propose a
general rule.
For example, if we observe five or six times that it rains as soon as we hang out the
washing, then we might propose that hanging out the washing causes it to rain.
Obviously, inductive reasoning has a basic flaw. Lots of special cases might fit the con-
clusion but that still does not prove that all cases will be true.
Here is a mathematical example:
Special case: 1+3 = 4
Special case: 1+3+5 = 9
Special case: 1+3+5+7 = 16
Special case: 1+3+5+7+9 = ?
There seems to be a pattern here. The next answer in this sequence looks like it should
be 25 (or 52 ). To propose a general rule we need to relate the right-hand side to the left.
The sum of the first 3 odd counting numbers = 9 = 32
The sum of the first 4 odd counting numbers = 16 = 42
Perhaps the relationship is
The sum of the first n odd counting numbers = n2 .
This is a proposition P (n).
P (n) : 1 + 2 + 3 + . . . + nth odd counting number = n2
It would help to replace the phrase “nth odd counting number” with something more
mathematical.
2nd odd number (n = 2) is 3
3rd odd number (n = 3) is 5
4th odd number (n = 4) is 7
5th odd number (n = 5) is 9
G Coates 1 August 2013
In each case, the “nth odd number” is one less than double n, so
P (n) : 1 + 2 + 3 + . . . + (2n − 1) = n2
Now, how do we prove that P (n) is true for all cases (ie. n ≥ 1)?
The Principle of Mathematical Induction uses the structure of propositions like
this to develop a proof. What we do is assume we know that the proposition is true for
an arbitrary special case (call it n = k) and then use this assumption to show that the
proposition is true for the next special case (ie. n = k + 1).
In our example, we know that the proposition is true for n = 2, 3 and 4. (In fact, it’s
clearly also true for n = 1.) So, we know it’s true for k = 4. If we have shown that the
statement above in italics is true, this automatically proves the proposition is true for the
next one, k = 5.
Now we know it’s true for k = 5, it must also be true for k = 6, and so on.
In mathematical notation, here is the definition of Mathematical Induction:
The Principle of Mathematical Induction
Suppose P(n) is a proposition defined for every integer n ≥ a.
If (1) P (a) is true, and
(2) P (k + 1) is true assuming P (k) is true, where k ≥ a,
then P (n) is true for all integers n ≥ a.
To prove (2) in our example, start with what we are allowed to assume:
P (k) : 1 + 3 + . . . + (2k − 1) = k 2 .
Now state what we need to prove:
P (k + 1) : 1 + 3 + . . . + (2(k + 1) − 1) = (k + 1)2 .
How can we use P (k) to prove P (k + 1)? Well, the left-hand side (LHS) of the formula
for P (k + 1) is just the LHS of the formula for P (k) plus an extra term:
P (k + 1) : 1 + 3 + . . . + (2k − 1) + (2(k + 1) − 1) = (k + 1)2 .
If we replace these terms with the assumed right-hand side of P (k) we get
P (k + 1) : k 2 + (2(k + 1) − 1) = (k + 1)2 .
We now manipulate this new LHS to make it equal to the right-hand side (RHS):
k 2 + (2(k + 1) − 1) = k 2 + 2k + 2 − 1
= k 2 + 2k + 1
= (k + 1)2
= RHS
G Coates 2 August 2013
We now know that P (1) is true (by direct examination) and P (k + 1) is true if P (k) is
true for k ≥ 1. Hence we have proved the proposition by induction.
There are two other broad proposition structures that can be proved by induction, divis-
ibility and inequality propositions.
Divisibility: Prove P (n) : 32n − 1 is divisible by 8 for n ≥ 1.
(1) The smallest value of n is 1 so P (1) claims that 32 − 1 = 8 is divisible by 8. Clearly
this is true.
(2) We assume that P (k) is true, so 32k − 1 is assumed to be divisible by 8.
Now, P (k + 1) states that 32(k+1) − 1 is divisible by 8. To prove it, re-arrange this
expression to include 32k − 1:
32(k+1) − 1 = 32k+2 − 1
= 9 × 32k − 1
= 9 32k − 1 + 8
We now have two terms. The first is divisible by 8 because we assume the factor in
brackets is divisible by 8. The second is just 8 so that is also divisible by 8.
Hence, by the principle of mathematical induction, P (n) is true for all integers
n ≥ 1.
Inequality: Prove P (n) : 2n > n + 4 for n ≥ 3.
(1) The smallest value of n is 3 so P (3) claims that 23 = 8 is greater than 3 + 4 = 7.
Clearly this is true.
(2) We assume that P (k) is true, so 2k > k + 4 is assumed to be true.
Now, P (k + 1) states that 2k+1 > (k + 1) + 4.
With inequalities it helps to have zero on one side:
2k+1 − (k + 1) − 4 > 0
Now, this can be re-arranged to include 2k :
2 × 2k − k − 5 > 0
We are assuming that 2k > k + 4 so, if we replace 2k in the above expression with
the smaller number k + 4, we produce a smaller result. So:
2 × 2k − k − 5 > 2(k + 4) − k − 5
G Coates 3 August 2013
Now, 2(k + 4) − k − 5 = k + 3 so
2 × 2k − k − 5 > k + 3.
Since k ≥ 3, we know that k + 3 > 0, so
2 × 2k − k − 5 > k + 3 > 0.
Hence, by the principle of mathematical induction, P (n) is true for all integers
n ≥ 1.
Exercises
Prove the following propositions using mathematical induction:
(n + 1)(3n + 2)
1. 1 + 4 + 7 + . . . + (3n + 1) = for n ≥ 0.
2
5n − 1
2. 1 + 5 + 52 + . . . + 5n−1 = for n ≥ 1.
4
n(n + 1)
3. 1 + 2 + 3 + ... + n = for n ≥ 1.
2
n(n + 1)(2n + 1)
4. 12 + 22 + 32 + . . . + n2 = for n ≥ 1.
6
n2 (n + 1)2
5. 13 + 23 + 33 + . . . + n3 = for n ≥ 1.
4
1 − rn+1
6. 1 + r + r2 + . . . + rn = for n ≥ 0 and any r 6= 1.
1−r
7. 2n > n for n ≥ 1.
8.* 4n > n2 for n ≥ 1.
1 1 1 n
9. + + ... + = for n ≥ 1.
1×2 2×3 n(n + 1) n+1
10. (1 + a)n ≥ 1 + na for n ≥ 1 where a > −1 is a fixed real number.
11. (a) 72n − 1 is divisible by 48 for n ≥ 1.
(b)* n3 + 5n is divisible by 6 for n ≥ 1.
G Coates 4 August 2013
