3
$\begingroup$

I'm new to inductive proofs so I need some commentary on my proof since the book only gives a hint in the back. In "Discrete Mathematics with Applications" by Epp Third Edition in section 4.3 problem 13 states

For any integer $ n \ge 1, x^n - y^n$ is divisible by $(x - y)$ where x and y are any integers with $ x \ne y $

My Proof is as follows.

let $ Q(n) = x^n - y^n $

Then the base case is

$ Q(1) = x^1 - y^1 $

Now

$ Q(n + 1) = x^{n+1} - y^{n+1} = (x^n + y^n)(x-y)$

So now we can see $(x-y)$ is a factor and in turn divisible by $(x-y)$. I have just one hesitation. I didn't substitute from the inductive hypotheses. In every other inductive proof I've done this was a necessary step. My intuition on induction tells me that I have basically set up all of the dominoes but failed to knock down the first one (the substitution). Is this necessary for a valid proof or does this hold?

$\endgroup$
8
  • $\begingroup$ Your last equality is false. $(x^n+y^n)(x-y)=x^{n+1}+xy^n-x^ny-y^{n+1}$ $\endgroup$
    – Frank Lu
    Commented May 19, 2018 at 6:14
  • $\begingroup$ In your base case, you need to take out "$= 1 - 1 = 0 = 8(0)$". Your TA will take out partial credits when he sees it. $\endgroup$
    – Nobody
    Commented May 19, 2018 at 6:33
  • $\begingroup$ @scaaahu I'm not in school. I just do math because I want to understand Donald Knuth. But just out of curiosity why would they do that? Edit: Wait no. I see it. $\endgroup$ Commented May 19, 2018 at 6:37
  • $\begingroup$ What do you mean by "why would they do that?" do what? $\endgroup$
    – Nobody
    Commented May 19, 2018 at 6:40
  • $\begingroup$ @scaaahu Why would they mark me off. But never mind I see the error now. $\endgroup$ Commented May 19, 2018 at 6:45

3 Answers 3

8
$\begingroup$

Your factorisation is incorrect. Use $x^{n+1}-y^{n+1}=x(x^n-y^n)+y^n(x-y)$.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ So if I'm understanding you correctly the substitution happens inside the term $ x(x^n - y^n) $ which would be $x(x-y) + y^n(x-y)$ ? Then I could proceed to factor or am I missing a factoring technique in my tool belt? $\endgroup$ Commented May 19, 2018 at 6:26
  • $\begingroup$ You do indeed use the inductive step to verify $x-y|x^n-y^n$, although the expression you wrote after that isn't right. $\endgroup$
    – J.G.
    Commented May 19, 2018 at 7:17
3
$\begingroup$

Non-Inductive Proof (or so I thought).


Proof: Suppose there exists $z$ such that $$x^n-y^n = z(x-y).$$ This would imply that $z=\dfrac{x^n-y^n}{x-y}$. Now, here comes the trick: $$\frac{x^n-y^n}{x-y} = \frac{x^{n-1}(x-y)+yx^{n-1}-y^n}{x-y}=x^{n-1}+y\left(\frac{x^{n-1}-y^{n-1}}{x-y}\right).$$ Continuing in the same way, it follows that $$x^{n-1}+y\left(\frac{x^{n-1}-y^{n-1}}{x-y}\right)=x^{n-1}+yx^{n-2}+y\left(\frac{x^{n-2}-y^{n-2}}{x-y}\right)=\cdots$$ to which a pattern can be noticed, namely, $$z=\sum_{k=1}^nx^{n-k}y^{k-1}\tag*{$\bigcirc$}$$


I decided to not do an inductive proof in order to explore a different way of tackling this problem :)

Edit: Turns out, it is an inductive proof, but it just skips the base case and is differently worded than usual. Credit to @J.G. who pointed that out :)

$\endgroup$
6
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ That's still induction. $\endgroup$
    – J.G.
    Commented May 19, 2018 at 8:05
  • $\begingroup$ @J.G. what do you mean? I have not used a base case, inductive hypothesis, or an inductive step. I just cleverly rewrote the numerator. $\endgroup$
    – Mr Pie
    Commented May 19, 2018 at 8:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ "It terminates like this" is your inductive hypothesis. $\endgroup$
    – J.G.
    Commented May 19, 2018 at 8:11
  • $\begingroup$ @J.G. hah... I didn't realise. Looks like it is an inductive proof. Is there a way of proving the assertion with-out the use of induction, do you know? $\endgroup$
    – Mr Pie
    Commented May 19, 2018 at 8:13
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I don't think so. I'm sure someone would suggest "use the factor theorem", but the proof of that probably requires induction on the degree of polynomials. My favourite on-SE discussion of what constitutes induction is math.stackexchange.com/a/1359020 $\endgroup$
    – J.G.
    Commented May 19, 2018 at 8:20
2
$\begingroup$

Following the suggestion by J.G., for the induction step we assume true that

  • $Q(n) = x^{n} - y^{n} = p_{n-1}(x)\cdot (x-y)$

were $p_{n-1}(x)$ is a polynomial of degree $n-1$ then

  • $Q(n+1) = x^{n+1} - y^{n+1} = x\cdot(x^n-y^n)+y^n(x-y)=x\cdot\,\color{red}{p_{n-1}(x)\cdot(x-y)}+y^n(x-y)=p_n(x)\cdot(x-y)$
$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I don't quite follow the notation you are using. Epp simply uses the variable r when using the inductive hypotheses for divisibility. Would this also be valid if? so then I think I proved it successfully on paper just before I logged on today. $ xr(x-y) + y^n(x-y) = (xr+y^n)(x-y) $ $\endgroup$ Commented May 19, 2018 at 22:01
  • $\begingroup$ Also Epp states that r is an integer. Sorry. $\endgroup$ Commented May 19, 2018 at 22:08
  • $\begingroup$ @PossiblyDakota $p_{n-1}(x)$ and $p_n(x)$ are just polynomials of degree $n−1$ and $n$ in $x$ and $y$ thus they can be also indicated as some integer $r_1$ and $r_2$. It is a minor issue in the proof. $\endgroup$
    – user
    Commented May 19, 2018 at 22:08

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .