0
$\begingroup$

Let $k : \mathbb{N}^{>0} \to \mathbb{R}$ be such that $k_n = n(t^{1/n} - 1)$, where $t \in [0, 1] \subset \mathbb{R}$. Note that $\lim_{n \to \infty} k_n = \log(t)$. The plot of $k$ for a given $t$ seems to be decreasing. Prove that $k$ is decreasing.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I would have thought $n(t^{1/n} - 1) \le 0$ if $0 \le t \le 1$ $\endgroup$ – Henry Nov 17 '14 at 21:52
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, and $\log(t)\lt0$ for $t$ in $(0,1)$... $\endgroup$ – Did Nov 17 '14 at 22:00
4
$\begingroup$

Let $s=t^{1/(n(n+1))}$ then $t^{1/n}=s^{n+1}$ and $t^{1/(n+1)}=s^n$ hence $k_{n+1}-k_n=u(s)$ where, for every $x$, $u(x)=(n+1)x^n-nx^{n+1}-1$. One sees that $u(1)=0$ and that $u'(x)=n(n+1)x^{n-1}(1-x)\gt0$ for every $x$ in $(0,1)$. This implies that $u(x)\lt0$ for every $x$ in $(0,1)$ hence $k_{n+1}\lt k_n$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ That's clever, and seems valid to me. I had trouble because of the differing exponents of t in the forward-difference. This takes care of them neatly right at the beginning. $\endgroup$ – kaba Nov 17 '14 at 22:17
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, the trick is not necessary for the proof, but it might make it easier to follow. $\endgroup$ – Did Nov 17 '14 at 22:25

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.