-1

Is k=$\sqrt{6+\sqrt{6+...}}$ monotonically increasing or is not ? i know it converges to $3$.

Gibberish
  • 337

1 Answers1

3

We can induct on the amount of nested roots.

Base Case:

$\sqrt{6} < \sqrt{6+\sqrt{6}} \implies 6 < 6 + \sqrt6 \implies 0 < \sqrt6$

Inductive step: Suppose that $\sqrt{6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n-1} \ times}} < \sqrt{6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n} \ times}}$. We prove: $\sqrt{6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n} \ times}} < \sqrt{6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n+1} \ times}}$.

$\sqrt{6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n} \ times}} < \sqrt{6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n+1} \ times}} \implies 6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n} \ times} < 6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n+1} \ times} \implies \underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n} \ times} < \underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n+1} \ times} \implies \sqrt{6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n-1} \ times}} < \sqrt{6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n} \ times}}$

So, by the inductive hypothesis, we have that $k_n < k_{n+1}$ for all $n$. Thus, the sequence $k$ is strictly monotonically increasing.

Please tell me if there is anything wrong with this solution.

EDIT

I proved this in reverse. The steps are equally valid in reverse, so the proof is essentially right anyway. In any case, here is an adapted version with a little explanation.

Suppose we have: $\sqrt{6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n-1} \ times}} < \sqrt{6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n} \ times}}$. This can just as well be written as: $\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n} \ times} < \underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n+1} \ times}$. Adding $6$ to both sides changes nothing, so we get: $6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n} \ times} < 6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n+1} \ times}$. We can then take the square root of both sides without worrying about flipping the inequality since both sides are clearly positive, this yields: $\sqrt{6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n} \ times}} < \sqrt{6+\underbrace{\sqrt{6+...}}_{\text{n+1} \ times}}$, as desired.

Thus, by the inductive hypothesis, $k$ is strictly monotonically increasing.

SescoMath
  • 1,909
  • I think you have a good approach to showing the sequence is monotone increasing (more nesting gives larger values), but the notation is somewhat clumsy, and in the end you have an implication that goes in the wrong direction (down instead of up). – hardmath Sep 23 '18 at 16:52
  • @hardmath ah you're right, my bad. Would it be sufficient to add that the steps are equally valid in the reverse direction? (albeit a little less obvious) – SescoMath Sep 23 '18 at 16:56