[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 38 KB, 800x600, SCI Guide 001 - Proof by Mathematical Induction.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3574475 No.3574475 [Reply] [Original]

I wrote this handy guide for new mathematicians struggling with the concept of proof by mathematical induction. No need to thank me, and I hope you look forward to further guides, /sci/!

>> No.3574511

Bump!

>> No.3574555

Bump! Helping new mathematicians, post your guides!

>> No.3574559

how to prove the conjecture for n=k???

>> No.3574579

>>3574559

You do not need to. Because you have assumed it for n=k, and proven it for n=1, let k=1, then it's true for n since n=k and since n is any number it's true for all n.

>> No.3574581

>>3574475
>>3574511
>>3574555
You're either a bad troll, or just plain stupid.

>> No.3574583

Have seen better to be honest.

>> No.3574587

>>3574581
>>3574583

You're pretty ignorant of mathematics I see. Please come back when you have a degree in it like myself.

>> No.3574590

>>3574583
>>3574587

Better trolling attempts, that is.

Although seeing your post i might have to rethink that one.

>> No.3574597

maybe you've forgotten the step where you prove it for k+1?

>> No.3574603

>>3574597

see: >>3574579

>> No.3574601

>>3574475
Hey OP, thanks, I had some problems with this before but now it's all clear.

>> No.3574625

>>3574579

No, you have shown it for n=1 and n=1 only. n is unique in your case, so you did not prove it for arbitrary n.

>> No.3574628

>>3574625

But by letting k = 1, since you've proven it for n=1, you have proven it for n=k, and k IS arbitrary

>> No.3574632

0/10
Would not read again

>> No.3574641

>>3574628

No, you have chosen n to be 1 and only 1. That is your flaw.

You can't just say n=1 and then oh no, it is not 1 it is arbitrary.

>> No.3574649

>mfw people think this isn't troll

>> No.3574651

>>3574641

Clearly you don't understand the slightest thing about stochastic analysis on manifolds.

>> No.3574657

hey OP. How would you prove by induction that

for any n
n = 1

?

>> No.3574663

>>3574475

You just proved the base case is true.
Then you assume that for an arbitrary k it is true and then prove it for k+1.
If you prove that it is valid for k+1. It is valid for any k.

>> No.3574666

>>3574651

Sigh, for a minute i thought you were just stupid.

2/10

>> No.3574710
File: 56 KB, 500x339, trollin.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3574710