Proofs by mathematical induction.

Подписаться 306 тыс.

Просмотров 14 тыс.

50% 1

We describe the principal of mathematical induction and give several examples.
Please Subscribe: www.youtube.co...
Merch: teespring.com/...
Personal Website: www.michael-pen...
Randolph College Math: www.randolphcol...
Randolph College Math and Science on Facebook: / randolph.science
Research Gate profile: www.researchga...
Google Scholar profile: scholar.google...
If you are going to use an ad-blocker, considering using brave and tipping me BAT!
brave.com/sdp793
Buy textbooks here and help me out: amzn.to/31Bj9ye
Buy an amazon gift card and help me out: amzn.to/2PComAf
Books I like:
Sacred Mathematics: Japanese Temple Geometry: amzn.to/2ZIadH9
Electricity and Magnetism for Mathematicians: amzn.to/2H8ePzL
Abstract Algebra:
Judson(online): abstract.ups.edu/
Judson(print): amzn.to/2Xg92wD
Dummit and Foote: amzn.to/2zYOrok
Gallian: amzn.to/2zg4YEo
Artin: amzn.to/2LQ8l7C
Differential Forms:
Bachman: amzn.to/2z9wljH
Number Theory:
Crisman(online): math.gordon.edu...
Strayer: amzn.to/3bXwLah
Andrews: amzn.to/2zWlOZ0
Analysis:
Abbot: amzn.to/3cwYtuF
How to think about Analysis: amzn.to/2AIhwVm
Calculus:
OpenStax(online): openstax.org/s...
OpenStax Vol 1: amzn.to/2zlreN8
OpenStax Vol 2: amzn.to/2TtwoxH
OpenStax Vol 3: amzn.to/3bPJ3Bn
My Filming Equipment:
Camera: amzn.to/3kx2JzE
Lense: amzn.to/2PFxPXA
Audio Recorder: amzn.to/2XLzkaZ
Microphones: amzn.to/3fJED0T
Lights: amzn.to/2XHxRT0
White Chalk: amzn.to/3ipu3Oh
Color Chalk: amzn.to/2XL6eIJ

Опубликовано:

14 окт 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 51

@piotryjak5643 3 года назад

It would be so great if you could make it easier to find previous parts of your courses. A playlist, or even an old-fashioned link in the description to a first video of you multi part content would be so helpful. Great content, love how fluent you are, just freaking badass, you mister are a rock star.

@MichaelPennMath 3 года назад

There are playlists, but maybe they are hard to find. I just hired a student today that is going to help me organize things!! So things should be improving.

@tomatrix7525 3 года назад

@@MichaelPennMath wow, sounds good! You’re channel is really becoming a gem

@marienbad2 3 года назад

Agree. I actually went through and made a playlist of some videos on here I wanted to watch and saved it so I could watch them all in order later. Was a pain to do though lol!

@goodplacetostop2973 3 года назад

@@MichaelPennMath Make sure this student knows where are the good places to stop.

@buxeessingh2571 3 года назад

I used to use that thumbnail in class. Very few admitted they got the joke. I want to emphasise the importance of remembering the base case in the induction step. Often, how you would perform your induction can be discovered from using the n = 1 case in a proof for n = 2. That is where you would use the base case in the induction step.

@goodplacetostop2973 3 года назад

23:34 Good Place To Sto-

@xcheese1 3 года назад

A man deft in liquor production Runs stills of flawless construction. The alcohol boils Through magnetic coils. He says that it’s “proof by induction.”

@heh2393 3 года назад

Epic!

@yakov9ify 2 года назад

I absolutely love proofs by induction and especially their variants such as the ones for graph theory, trees and ordinals. But my favorite has to be what I like to call Analytic Induction. It goes as follows: Let X be a connected topological space and P(x) is some property of every point x in X. Assume that there exists at least one element y in X such that P(y) is true. (base case). Also assume that if P(x) is true for some x then there exists an open neighborhood U of x in X such that P(z) is true for all z in U. Finally assume that if P(x_n) is true for some sequence of x_n's then P(z) is true for all limit points z of x_n. If you can show the above you have successfully proven that P(x) is true for all x in X. I love this because it gives me such a vivid image of what I am proving, the property P(x) spreading from point to point till it covers all of X. Absolutely beautiful.

@sinecurve9999 3 года назад

ElectroBOOM has entered the chat.

@eleazaralmazan4089 3 года назад

By far my favorite proof technique! #MathematicalInducation

@martinnyberg9295 3 года назад

@MichaelPenn Please tell us more about all your pretty chalk! It looks very nostalgic, and soft and comfortable. I haven’t taught using chalk since the 1990s; all I get to use these days are stinkin’ whyteboard pens. 😁

@MichaelPennMath 3 года назад

I use Hagoromo chalk. It is great. Chalk talks are still quite common even at fancy international math conferences!!

@tomatrix7525 3 года назад

I just noticed the thumbnail is a reference to electrical induction

@MrRyanroberson1 3 года назад

Interestingly, the angle sum rule doesn't require that the figure be convex, so long as it is euclidean (which is a bit of a circular definition, since euclidean space can be defined as that which obeys the angle sum for all polygons)

@lionking2192 3 года назад

Try India's exam 'JEE ADVANCED' maths problems... U will find very good calculus problems out there!!

@rockinroggenrola7277 3 года назад

If I'm not mistaken, didn't you make another video about induction before?

@MichaelPennMath 3 года назад

You are right, but that was for a problem solving group that I was coaching and this is more tailored to a class that I am teaching...

@marcozarantonello2180 3 года назад

This is a great video

@judysalazar0208 3 года назад

Professor Penn, in the induction hypothesis we assume that there exists some natural number k such that p(k) implies p(k+1)?

@Hobbit183 3 года назад

I like to watch these videos even if i understand very little ;) its meditating

@sapientum8 3 года назад

excellent content

@prathmeshraut1616 3 года назад

These is my first Sum of Exercise

@AntoshaPushkin 3 года назад

Isn't strong induction just a regular induction, but instead of P(n) we make a new predicate Q(n) which is Q(n) = for all k, k ≤ n => P(k) prove base and step for Q, and then we get Q(n) implies P(n) for all n?

@gaborendredi8161 3 года назад

In high school my math teacher once made an induction proof like this. He proved for n=2 as base case. Then he showed that P(n) => P(n^2) and P(n) => P(n-1). He claimed, that this way was still more easy than to show the usual P(n) => P(n+1). Unfortunately I don’t remember the statement he proved this way.

@fullfungo Год назад

IIRC it’s AM-GM

@nathanisbored 3 года назад

I like to imagine induction as like an infinite row of dominoes. For it to work, the dominoes need to be evenly spaced (which is why n and n+1 should be integers). Proving the induction step is like setting up the dominoes so that they are aligned, and showing the base case is like knocking over the first domino (though you can really do these in either order).

@travisnell6849 3 года назад

This really breaks down when we move to transfinite induction. You can do induction on a much broader class. In this context it's more important to think that if the property fails, it must have a first time it fails. The induction step(s) in this broader context are to make sure that there cannot be a first time it fails.

@blazedinfernape886 3 года назад

I think it as a staircase where you can only see the step you are on but you know that you can get on the next step. Now if both of these statements are true then you can climb up the staircase. If one of them or none of them are true then you can't climb up the staircase.

@travisnell6849 3 года назад

@@blazedinfernape886 These analogies break down immediately when one does induction on a well-founded partial order, rather than a well ordering.

@prithujsarkar2010 3 года назад

Awesome

@tomasbeltran04050 3 года назад

I left at 15:30. I'm writing down the examples.

@tylershepard4269 3 года назад

Hey now be careful when throwing shade at us Electrical Engineers. You are on the internet after all...

@michalbotor 3 года назад

(3:55) all horses are the same color (all people are the same height)

@poi_aithhkunnnRVC 3 года назад

23:34 broken "good place to stop" first

@aamierulharith5294 3 года назад

"One is even" hmmmmm press x to doubt

@peaceandknowledge3668 3 года назад

Hi!

@ozjapie 3 года назад

principal? principle

@martinnyberg9295 3 года назад

The principal tool is the principle of mathematical induction. 😏

@mathunt1130 2 года назад

You haven't proven the principle of induction is valid. You can find this proof in the book, Mathematical Analysis by K.G. Binmore.

@Loots1 2 года назад

heuristics and philosophy are not the same thing

@malawigw 3 года назад

Proof by induction shows that one is even

@davidbrisbane7206 3 года назад

Hello World

@thephysicistcuber175 3 года назад

@f5673-t1h 3 года назад

23:34 is a good place to stop

@CesarMaglione 3 года назад

¡7! great! ;) Well done! ¿Do you sleep at any moment? :P

@michalbotor 3 года назад

honestly? i hate proofs by induction. the only proofs that i hate more are proofs by contradiction (as these are like: proof: "therefore this exists", me: "ok. but how does it look like?" proof: "i dunno. but this exists!") and proofs involving axiom of choice (as these tend to produce hairy monsters, like vitali sets). and my quarrel with proofs by inductions is that they can be dangerous, if you mess up the base case, and even if they work they leave you completely in the dark as to what that you proved actually means. i prefer geometric/visual, combinatorial or probabilistic proofs instead, if possible. like with your 1 + 3 + 5 + ... = n^2 claim. it has a very natural visual proof, like so: .. O X O X O .. O X O X X .. O X O O O .. O X X X X .. O O O O O .. .. .. .. .. ..

@arch3866 3 года назад

I too always would prefer a visual proof, but I think proof by induction is also pretty neat since it seems to have a pretty simple process. I think, (depending on the p(n), I'm not sure how hard some p(n) can get to evaluate ) it'd be pretty hard to mess up. not sure about this tho also, the thought process hopefully should not be that difficult to understand, as it basically goes like this, as Michael explained: 1) ok so this works for n=1 2) let us say it works for some integer k>=1 3) oooh look it works for k+1 4) so that means it works for 1, 1+1=2, 3, 4 ... which is the set of natural numbers!! boom finished. not sure tho, I haven't done many proofs so I don't know how common/rare a specific type of proof is in olympiads, but I'd thinked that completely visual proof is rare. thanks for reading my ted talk

@michalbotor 3 года назад

@@arch3866 here's a "proof": let a be a real number different than zero, then a^n = 1 for every natural number n. proof by induction: base case: a^0 = 1 by definition. inductive step: lets assume that a^n =1 for all natural k