Prove for the Fibonacci sequence: $F(m+n) = F(m-1) cdot F(n) + F(m) cdot F(n+1)$
$begingroup$
The following formula shall be proved by induction:
$$F(m+n) = F(m-1) cdot F(n) + F(m) cdot F(n+1)$$
Where $F(i), i in mathbb{N}_0$ is the Fibonacci sequence defined as:
$F(0) = 0$, $F(1) = 1$ amd
$$F(n+1) = F(n) + F(n-1) text{ for } n geq 1.$$
How would you go about this task, especially considering that you have two variables which may be changed? Do you have to look at three cases ($m$ increases, $n$ increases, both $m$ and $n$ increase) in order to fully prove it or is there an easier way?
induction fibonacci-numbers
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The following formula shall be proved by induction:
$$F(m+n) = F(m-1) cdot F(n) + F(m) cdot F(n+1)$$
Where $F(i), i in mathbb{N}_0$ is the Fibonacci sequence defined as:
$F(0) = 0$, $F(1) = 1$ amd
$$F(n+1) = F(n) + F(n-1) text{ for } n geq 1.$$
How would you go about this task, especially considering that you have two variables which may be changed? Do you have to look at three cases ($m$ increases, $n$ increases, both $m$ and $n$ increase) in order to fully prove it or is there an easier way?
induction fibonacci-numbers
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You actually only need to prove the case $mmapsto m+1$ with $n$ kept constant, since the equation is, in fact, symmetric (replacing $n$ by $n-1$)
$endgroup$
– BAI
Dec 31 '18 at 17:22
$begingroup$
This identity have been here couple of times, for example Showing that an equation holds true with a Fibonacci sequence: $F_{n+m} = F_{n-1}F_m + F_n F_{m+1}$ and Product of consecutive Fibonacci numbers divisibility
$endgroup$
– Sil
Dec 31 '18 at 18:02
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The following formula shall be proved by induction:
$$F(m+n) = F(m-1) cdot F(n) + F(m) cdot F(n+1)$$
Where $F(i), i in mathbb{N}_0$ is the Fibonacci sequence defined as:
$F(0) = 0$, $F(1) = 1$ amd
$$F(n+1) = F(n) + F(n-1) text{ for } n geq 1.$$
How would you go about this task, especially considering that you have two variables which may be changed? Do you have to look at three cases ($m$ increases, $n$ increases, both $m$ and $n$ increase) in order to fully prove it or is there an easier way?
induction fibonacci-numbers
$endgroup$
The following formula shall be proved by induction:
$$F(m+n) = F(m-1) cdot F(n) + F(m) cdot F(n+1)$$
Where $F(i), i in mathbb{N}_0$ is the Fibonacci sequence defined as:
$F(0) = 0$, $F(1) = 1$ amd
$$F(n+1) = F(n) + F(n-1) text{ for } n geq 1.$$
How would you go about this task, especially considering that you have two variables which may be changed? Do you have to look at three cases ($m$ increases, $n$ increases, both $m$ and $n$ increase) in order to fully prove it or is there an easier way?
induction fibonacci-numbers
induction fibonacci-numbers
edited Dec 31 '18 at 20:47
Robert Z
98.8k1068139
98.8k1068139
asked Dec 31 '18 at 17:18
StckXchnge-nub12StckXchnge-nub12
355
355
$begingroup$
You actually only need to prove the case $mmapsto m+1$ with $n$ kept constant, since the equation is, in fact, symmetric (replacing $n$ by $n-1$)
$endgroup$
– BAI
Dec 31 '18 at 17:22
$begingroup$
This identity have been here couple of times, for example Showing that an equation holds true with a Fibonacci sequence: $F_{n+m} = F_{n-1}F_m + F_n F_{m+1}$ and Product of consecutive Fibonacci numbers divisibility
$endgroup$
– Sil
Dec 31 '18 at 18:02
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You actually only need to prove the case $mmapsto m+1$ with $n$ kept constant, since the equation is, in fact, symmetric (replacing $n$ by $n-1$)
$endgroup$
– BAI
Dec 31 '18 at 17:22
$begingroup$
This identity have been here couple of times, for example Showing that an equation holds true with a Fibonacci sequence: $F_{n+m} = F_{n-1}F_m + F_n F_{m+1}$ and Product of consecutive Fibonacci numbers divisibility
$endgroup$
– Sil
Dec 31 '18 at 18:02
$begingroup$
You actually only need to prove the case $mmapsto m+1$ with $n$ kept constant, since the equation is, in fact, symmetric (replacing $n$ by $n-1$)
$endgroup$
– BAI
Dec 31 '18 at 17:22
$begingroup$
You actually only need to prove the case $mmapsto m+1$ with $n$ kept constant, since the equation is, in fact, symmetric (replacing $n$ by $n-1$)
$endgroup$
– BAI
Dec 31 '18 at 17:22
$begingroup$
This identity have been here couple of times, for example Showing that an equation holds true with a Fibonacci sequence: $F_{n+m} = F_{n-1}F_m + F_n F_{m+1}$ and Product of consecutive Fibonacci numbers divisibility
$endgroup$
– Sil
Dec 31 '18 at 18:02
$begingroup$
This identity have been here couple of times, for example Showing that an equation holds true with a Fibonacci sequence: $F_{n+m} = F_{n-1}F_m + F_n F_{m+1}$ and Product of consecutive Fibonacci numbers divisibility
$endgroup$
– Sil
Dec 31 '18 at 18:02
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Here is a proof in the same spirit as RobertZ's.
First, let's relate the Fibonacci numbers to the following problem:
Suppose that you want to go up some flight of stairs and at every step you can take either one or two stairs: in how many ways can you get up the stairs?
Well, if we say that there are $n$ stairs, then it turns out there are $F_{n+1}$ ways to do it.
A very easy inductive proof shows why:
Base cases: If there is $1$ stairs, you can do it in only $1$ way, and indeed $F_{1+1}=F_2=1$. If there are $2$ stairs, then there are two ways: either take two steps of $1$, or take one step of $2$. And indeed, $F_{2+1}=F_3=2$
Inductive step: Say you have $n >2$ stairs. For your first step you can either go one up or two stairs up. By inductive hypothesis, there are $F_{n}$ ways to finish climbing the $n-1$ stairs after having taken a step of $1$ stairs, and there are $F_{n-1}$ ways to finish climbing the $n-2$ stairs after having taken a step of $2$ stairs. So, there are $F_{n}+F_{n-1}=F_{n+1}$ ways to climb $n$ stairs.
OK, so now that we have made a connection between the Fibonacci numbers and the number of ways to climb stairs in this way, we can prove your desired result very quickly:
Let's climb $m+n-1$ stairs. We now know we can do this in $F_{m+n}$ ways. But note that there are two different possibilities for us climbing those $m+n-1$ stairs:
The first way is that as we climb the stairs, we will at some point have climbed exactly $n$ stairs. If this happens, then there are $m-1$ stairs left to climb, which can be done in $F_m$ ways. And since then there are $F_{n+1}$ ways to climb the first $n$ stairs, that means that there are $F_m cdot F_{n+1}$ ways to climb all the $m+n-1$ stairs this way.
The second way is that at some point we will have climbed exactly $n-1$ stairs, which can be done in $F_{n}$ ways, after which we take a single step of $2$ stairs, and then finish climbing the remaining $m-2$ stairs. This can therefore be done in $F_{m-1} cdot F_{n}$ ways
The total number of ways to climb the $m+n-1$ stairs, then, is the sum of these two ways, and so it must be true that:
$$F_{m+n} = F_{m-1} cdot F_{n} + F_{m} cdot F_{n+1}$$
So note that after I established the connection between climbing stairs and the Fobonacci numbers, the proof was straightforward (and did not use induction). But to establish the connection, I used induction.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Nice variant (+1). See also math.stackexchange.com/a/11527/299698
$endgroup$
– Robert Z
Dec 31 '18 at 20:53
$begingroup$
@RobertZ :) And here I thought I was original ...
$endgroup$
– Bram28
Jan 1 at 13:25
$begingroup$
Have you any suggestion to improve my answer? Unfortunately it did not have much success :-(
$endgroup$
– Robert Z
Jan 1 at 13:34
$begingroup$
@RobertZ Maybe you could try and show a picture of the domino covering ... both to establish the connection between F numbers and dominoes and then applied to this particular problem
$endgroup$
– Bram28
Jan 1 at 13:54
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You can get away with inducting on just $n$:
$$ begin{align} F(m + n) & = F(m + (n - 1)) + F(m + (n -2))\
& = F(m-1)F(n-1) + F(m)F(n) + F(m-1)F(n-2) + F(m)F(n-1) \
& = F(m-1)[F(n-1) + F(n-2)] + F(m)[F(n)+F(n-1)] \
& = F(m-1)F(n) + F(m)F(n+1)end{align}$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Can you explain in greater detail the steps you took? You already lost me on the very first one. It seems you have somehow replaced $F(n)$ with the recursive definition of the fibonacci sequence (the last formula I listed), but I didn't even know you can split apart the term partially like that. Isn't the $F(m+n)$ to be seen as static, i.e. if $m=2$ and $n = 3$, you have to solve the entire sum $F(5)$, and can't just partially solve the "3 part" of the fibonacci? Hard to explain my issue, I hope you get what I mean.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 17:42
$begingroup$
Hi, using your example: if $m = 2, n = 3$, $n + m = 5$ then $F(5) = F(4) + F(3)$ by the definition of the Fibonacci sequence. Note then that $n + m -1 = 4$ and $n + m - 2 = 3$ which is my first step.
$endgroup$
– ODF
Dec 31 '18 at 17:46
$begingroup$
In the second step I induct on $n$, in the third I just gather like terms and in the final I use the fact that $F(n) = F(n-1) + F(n-2)$ and that $F(n+1) = F(n) + F(n-1)$.
$endgroup$
– ODF
Dec 31 '18 at 17:47
$begingroup$
Alright, I've finally understood your solution; thank you! Just for the record, in order to turn it into an actual proof by induction, I believe you have to proof $F(m+n+1) = F(m-1)cdot F(n+1) + F(m) cdot F(n+2)$ using the very same steps you took.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 18:28
$begingroup$
I must revise myself. I think there's an issue here. In the second line, you would apply the induction precondition. If we are inducting on $n$, that means we can only apply it on an $n$, but not e.g. on an $n-1$. But in your calculations you do apply it on just any $n$, so you basically assume that the precondition already applies for every single $n$ (i.e. $n, n+1, n-1, ldots$) when in reality we only defined it to apply to a fix $n$ for the sake of the proof.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 19:59
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
I won't mention every use of induction. Define $$M:=left(begin{array}{cc}
0 & 1\
1 & 1
end{array}right),,V_{n}:=left(begin{array}{c}
F_{n}\
F_{n+1}
end{array}right)=M^{n}left(begin{array}{c}
0\
1
end{array}right)$$ so $M^{m}=left(begin{array}{cc}
F_{m-1} & F_{m}\
F_{m} & F_{m+1}
end{array}right)$ and $$left(begin{array}{c}
F_{m+n}\
F_{m+n+1}
end{array}right)=M^{m}left(begin{array}{c}
F_{n}\
F_{n+1}
end{array}right)=left(begin{array}{c}
F_{m-1}F_{n}+F_{m}F_{n+1}\
F_{m}F_{n}+F_{m+1}F_{n+1}
end{array}right).$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A combinatorial proof (no induction).
Using the representation of the Fibonacci numbers as the numbers of domino coverings the given identity can be shown in a quick and elegant way.
It is known that the number of domino coverings of a $2times N$ grid is $F_{N+1}$. Consider the number of domino coverings of a $2times (m+n-1)$ grid. Any covering can be of two types.
1) The covering has a pair of horizontal dominoes at position $m-1$ and $m$.
Therefore on the left side we have a covering of a $2times (m-2)$ grid
and on the right side we have a covering of a $2times (n-1)$ grid. Therefore the number of such coverings is
$F_{m-1}cdot F_{n}$.
2) The covering can be split into two coverings, one of a $2times (m-1)$ grid and another of a $2times n$ grid.
Therefore the number of such coverings is
$F_{m}cdot F_{n+1}$.
Finally we may conclude that the number of domino coverings of a $2times (m+n-1)$ grid is
$$F_{m+n}=F_{m-1}cdot F_{n}+F_{m}cdot F_{n+1}.$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3057874%2fprove-for-the-fibonacci-sequence-fmn-fm-1-cdot-fn-fm-cdot-fn1%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Here is a proof in the same spirit as RobertZ's.
First, let's relate the Fibonacci numbers to the following problem:
Suppose that you want to go up some flight of stairs and at every step you can take either one or two stairs: in how many ways can you get up the stairs?
Well, if we say that there are $n$ stairs, then it turns out there are $F_{n+1}$ ways to do it.
A very easy inductive proof shows why:
Base cases: If there is $1$ stairs, you can do it in only $1$ way, and indeed $F_{1+1}=F_2=1$. If there are $2$ stairs, then there are two ways: either take two steps of $1$, or take one step of $2$. And indeed, $F_{2+1}=F_3=2$
Inductive step: Say you have $n >2$ stairs. For your first step you can either go one up or two stairs up. By inductive hypothesis, there are $F_{n}$ ways to finish climbing the $n-1$ stairs after having taken a step of $1$ stairs, and there are $F_{n-1}$ ways to finish climbing the $n-2$ stairs after having taken a step of $2$ stairs. So, there are $F_{n}+F_{n-1}=F_{n+1}$ ways to climb $n$ stairs.
OK, so now that we have made a connection between the Fibonacci numbers and the number of ways to climb stairs in this way, we can prove your desired result very quickly:
Let's climb $m+n-1$ stairs. We now know we can do this in $F_{m+n}$ ways. But note that there are two different possibilities for us climbing those $m+n-1$ stairs:
The first way is that as we climb the stairs, we will at some point have climbed exactly $n$ stairs. If this happens, then there are $m-1$ stairs left to climb, which can be done in $F_m$ ways. And since then there are $F_{n+1}$ ways to climb the first $n$ stairs, that means that there are $F_m cdot F_{n+1}$ ways to climb all the $m+n-1$ stairs this way.
The second way is that at some point we will have climbed exactly $n-1$ stairs, which can be done in $F_{n}$ ways, after which we take a single step of $2$ stairs, and then finish climbing the remaining $m-2$ stairs. This can therefore be done in $F_{m-1} cdot F_{n}$ ways
The total number of ways to climb the $m+n-1$ stairs, then, is the sum of these two ways, and so it must be true that:
$$F_{m+n} = F_{m-1} cdot F_{n} + F_{m} cdot F_{n+1}$$
So note that after I established the connection between climbing stairs and the Fobonacci numbers, the proof was straightforward (and did not use induction). But to establish the connection, I used induction.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Nice variant (+1). See also math.stackexchange.com/a/11527/299698
$endgroup$
– Robert Z
Dec 31 '18 at 20:53
$begingroup$
@RobertZ :) And here I thought I was original ...
$endgroup$
– Bram28
Jan 1 at 13:25
$begingroup$
Have you any suggestion to improve my answer? Unfortunately it did not have much success :-(
$endgroup$
– Robert Z
Jan 1 at 13:34
$begingroup$
@RobertZ Maybe you could try and show a picture of the domino covering ... both to establish the connection between F numbers and dominoes and then applied to this particular problem
$endgroup$
– Bram28
Jan 1 at 13:54
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Here is a proof in the same spirit as RobertZ's.
First, let's relate the Fibonacci numbers to the following problem:
Suppose that you want to go up some flight of stairs and at every step you can take either one or two stairs: in how many ways can you get up the stairs?
Well, if we say that there are $n$ stairs, then it turns out there are $F_{n+1}$ ways to do it.
A very easy inductive proof shows why:
Base cases: If there is $1$ stairs, you can do it in only $1$ way, and indeed $F_{1+1}=F_2=1$. If there are $2$ stairs, then there are two ways: either take two steps of $1$, or take one step of $2$. And indeed, $F_{2+1}=F_3=2$
Inductive step: Say you have $n >2$ stairs. For your first step you can either go one up or two stairs up. By inductive hypothesis, there are $F_{n}$ ways to finish climbing the $n-1$ stairs after having taken a step of $1$ stairs, and there are $F_{n-1}$ ways to finish climbing the $n-2$ stairs after having taken a step of $2$ stairs. So, there are $F_{n}+F_{n-1}=F_{n+1}$ ways to climb $n$ stairs.
OK, so now that we have made a connection between the Fibonacci numbers and the number of ways to climb stairs in this way, we can prove your desired result very quickly:
Let's climb $m+n-1$ stairs. We now know we can do this in $F_{m+n}$ ways. But note that there are two different possibilities for us climbing those $m+n-1$ stairs:
The first way is that as we climb the stairs, we will at some point have climbed exactly $n$ stairs. If this happens, then there are $m-1$ stairs left to climb, which can be done in $F_m$ ways. And since then there are $F_{n+1}$ ways to climb the first $n$ stairs, that means that there are $F_m cdot F_{n+1}$ ways to climb all the $m+n-1$ stairs this way.
The second way is that at some point we will have climbed exactly $n-1$ stairs, which can be done in $F_{n}$ ways, after which we take a single step of $2$ stairs, and then finish climbing the remaining $m-2$ stairs. This can therefore be done in $F_{m-1} cdot F_{n}$ ways
The total number of ways to climb the $m+n-1$ stairs, then, is the sum of these two ways, and so it must be true that:
$$F_{m+n} = F_{m-1} cdot F_{n} + F_{m} cdot F_{n+1}$$
So note that after I established the connection between climbing stairs and the Fobonacci numbers, the proof was straightforward (and did not use induction). But to establish the connection, I used induction.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Nice variant (+1). See also math.stackexchange.com/a/11527/299698
$endgroup$
– Robert Z
Dec 31 '18 at 20:53
$begingroup$
@RobertZ :) And here I thought I was original ...
$endgroup$
– Bram28
Jan 1 at 13:25
$begingroup$
Have you any suggestion to improve my answer? Unfortunately it did not have much success :-(
$endgroup$
– Robert Z
Jan 1 at 13:34
$begingroup$
@RobertZ Maybe you could try and show a picture of the domino covering ... both to establish the connection between F numbers and dominoes and then applied to this particular problem
$endgroup$
– Bram28
Jan 1 at 13:54
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Here is a proof in the same spirit as RobertZ's.
First, let's relate the Fibonacci numbers to the following problem:
Suppose that you want to go up some flight of stairs and at every step you can take either one or two stairs: in how many ways can you get up the stairs?
Well, if we say that there are $n$ stairs, then it turns out there are $F_{n+1}$ ways to do it.
A very easy inductive proof shows why:
Base cases: If there is $1$ stairs, you can do it in only $1$ way, and indeed $F_{1+1}=F_2=1$. If there are $2$ stairs, then there are two ways: either take two steps of $1$, or take one step of $2$. And indeed, $F_{2+1}=F_3=2$
Inductive step: Say you have $n >2$ stairs. For your first step you can either go one up or two stairs up. By inductive hypothesis, there are $F_{n}$ ways to finish climbing the $n-1$ stairs after having taken a step of $1$ stairs, and there are $F_{n-1}$ ways to finish climbing the $n-2$ stairs after having taken a step of $2$ stairs. So, there are $F_{n}+F_{n-1}=F_{n+1}$ ways to climb $n$ stairs.
OK, so now that we have made a connection between the Fibonacci numbers and the number of ways to climb stairs in this way, we can prove your desired result very quickly:
Let's climb $m+n-1$ stairs. We now know we can do this in $F_{m+n}$ ways. But note that there are two different possibilities for us climbing those $m+n-1$ stairs:
The first way is that as we climb the stairs, we will at some point have climbed exactly $n$ stairs. If this happens, then there are $m-1$ stairs left to climb, which can be done in $F_m$ ways. And since then there are $F_{n+1}$ ways to climb the first $n$ stairs, that means that there are $F_m cdot F_{n+1}$ ways to climb all the $m+n-1$ stairs this way.
The second way is that at some point we will have climbed exactly $n-1$ stairs, which can be done in $F_{n}$ ways, after which we take a single step of $2$ stairs, and then finish climbing the remaining $m-2$ stairs. This can therefore be done in $F_{m-1} cdot F_{n}$ ways
The total number of ways to climb the $m+n-1$ stairs, then, is the sum of these two ways, and so it must be true that:
$$F_{m+n} = F_{m-1} cdot F_{n} + F_{m} cdot F_{n+1}$$
So note that after I established the connection between climbing stairs and the Fobonacci numbers, the proof was straightforward (and did not use induction). But to establish the connection, I used induction.
$endgroup$
Here is a proof in the same spirit as RobertZ's.
First, let's relate the Fibonacci numbers to the following problem:
Suppose that you want to go up some flight of stairs and at every step you can take either one or two stairs: in how many ways can you get up the stairs?
Well, if we say that there are $n$ stairs, then it turns out there are $F_{n+1}$ ways to do it.
A very easy inductive proof shows why:
Base cases: If there is $1$ stairs, you can do it in only $1$ way, and indeed $F_{1+1}=F_2=1$. If there are $2$ stairs, then there are two ways: either take two steps of $1$, or take one step of $2$. And indeed, $F_{2+1}=F_3=2$
Inductive step: Say you have $n >2$ stairs. For your first step you can either go one up or two stairs up. By inductive hypothesis, there are $F_{n}$ ways to finish climbing the $n-1$ stairs after having taken a step of $1$ stairs, and there are $F_{n-1}$ ways to finish climbing the $n-2$ stairs after having taken a step of $2$ stairs. So, there are $F_{n}+F_{n-1}=F_{n+1}$ ways to climb $n$ stairs.
OK, so now that we have made a connection between the Fibonacci numbers and the number of ways to climb stairs in this way, we can prove your desired result very quickly:
Let's climb $m+n-1$ stairs. We now know we can do this in $F_{m+n}$ ways. But note that there are two different possibilities for us climbing those $m+n-1$ stairs:
The first way is that as we climb the stairs, we will at some point have climbed exactly $n$ stairs. If this happens, then there are $m-1$ stairs left to climb, which can be done in $F_m$ ways. And since then there are $F_{n+1}$ ways to climb the first $n$ stairs, that means that there are $F_m cdot F_{n+1}$ ways to climb all the $m+n-1$ stairs this way.
The second way is that at some point we will have climbed exactly $n-1$ stairs, which can be done in $F_{n}$ ways, after which we take a single step of $2$ stairs, and then finish climbing the remaining $m-2$ stairs. This can therefore be done in $F_{m-1} cdot F_{n}$ ways
The total number of ways to climb the $m+n-1$ stairs, then, is the sum of these two ways, and so it must be true that:
$$F_{m+n} = F_{m-1} cdot F_{n} + F_{m} cdot F_{n+1}$$
So note that after I established the connection between climbing stairs and the Fobonacci numbers, the proof was straightforward (and did not use induction). But to establish the connection, I used induction.
answered Dec 31 '18 at 17:44
Bram28Bram28
63.2k44793
63.2k44793
$begingroup$
Nice variant (+1). See also math.stackexchange.com/a/11527/299698
$endgroup$
– Robert Z
Dec 31 '18 at 20:53
$begingroup$
@RobertZ :) And here I thought I was original ...
$endgroup$
– Bram28
Jan 1 at 13:25
$begingroup$
Have you any suggestion to improve my answer? Unfortunately it did not have much success :-(
$endgroup$
– Robert Z
Jan 1 at 13:34
$begingroup$
@RobertZ Maybe you could try and show a picture of the domino covering ... both to establish the connection between F numbers and dominoes and then applied to this particular problem
$endgroup$
– Bram28
Jan 1 at 13:54
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Nice variant (+1). See also math.stackexchange.com/a/11527/299698
$endgroup$
– Robert Z
Dec 31 '18 at 20:53
$begingroup$
@RobertZ :) And here I thought I was original ...
$endgroup$
– Bram28
Jan 1 at 13:25
$begingroup$
Have you any suggestion to improve my answer? Unfortunately it did not have much success :-(
$endgroup$
– Robert Z
Jan 1 at 13:34
$begingroup$
@RobertZ Maybe you could try and show a picture of the domino covering ... both to establish the connection between F numbers and dominoes and then applied to this particular problem
$endgroup$
– Bram28
Jan 1 at 13:54
$begingroup$
Nice variant (+1). See also math.stackexchange.com/a/11527/299698
$endgroup$
– Robert Z
Dec 31 '18 at 20:53
$begingroup$
Nice variant (+1). See also math.stackexchange.com/a/11527/299698
$endgroup$
– Robert Z
Dec 31 '18 at 20:53
$begingroup$
@RobertZ :) And here I thought I was original ...
$endgroup$
– Bram28
Jan 1 at 13:25
$begingroup$
@RobertZ :) And here I thought I was original ...
$endgroup$
– Bram28
Jan 1 at 13:25
$begingroup$
Have you any suggestion to improve my answer? Unfortunately it did not have much success :-(
$endgroup$
– Robert Z
Jan 1 at 13:34
$begingroup$
Have you any suggestion to improve my answer? Unfortunately it did not have much success :-(
$endgroup$
– Robert Z
Jan 1 at 13:34
$begingroup$
@RobertZ Maybe you could try and show a picture of the domino covering ... both to establish the connection between F numbers and dominoes and then applied to this particular problem
$endgroup$
– Bram28
Jan 1 at 13:54
$begingroup$
@RobertZ Maybe you could try and show a picture of the domino covering ... both to establish the connection between F numbers and dominoes and then applied to this particular problem
$endgroup$
– Bram28
Jan 1 at 13:54
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You can get away with inducting on just $n$:
$$ begin{align} F(m + n) & = F(m + (n - 1)) + F(m + (n -2))\
& = F(m-1)F(n-1) + F(m)F(n) + F(m-1)F(n-2) + F(m)F(n-1) \
& = F(m-1)[F(n-1) + F(n-2)] + F(m)[F(n)+F(n-1)] \
& = F(m-1)F(n) + F(m)F(n+1)end{align}$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Can you explain in greater detail the steps you took? You already lost me on the very first one. It seems you have somehow replaced $F(n)$ with the recursive definition of the fibonacci sequence (the last formula I listed), but I didn't even know you can split apart the term partially like that. Isn't the $F(m+n)$ to be seen as static, i.e. if $m=2$ and $n = 3$, you have to solve the entire sum $F(5)$, and can't just partially solve the "3 part" of the fibonacci? Hard to explain my issue, I hope you get what I mean.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 17:42
$begingroup$
Hi, using your example: if $m = 2, n = 3$, $n + m = 5$ then $F(5) = F(4) + F(3)$ by the definition of the Fibonacci sequence. Note then that $n + m -1 = 4$ and $n + m - 2 = 3$ which is my first step.
$endgroup$
– ODF
Dec 31 '18 at 17:46
$begingroup$
In the second step I induct on $n$, in the third I just gather like terms and in the final I use the fact that $F(n) = F(n-1) + F(n-2)$ and that $F(n+1) = F(n) + F(n-1)$.
$endgroup$
– ODF
Dec 31 '18 at 17:47
$begingroup$
Alright, I've finally understood your solution; thank you! Just for the record, in order to turn it into an actual proof by induction, I believe you have to proof $F(m+n+1) = F(m-1)cdot F(n+1) + F(m) cdot F(n+2)$ using the very same steps you took.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 18:28
$begingroup$
I must revise myself. I think there's an issue here. In the second line, you would apply the induction precondition. If we are inducting on $n$, that means we can only apply it on an $n$, but not e.g. on an $n-1$. But in your calculations you do apply it on just any $n$, so you basically assume that the precondition already applies for every single $n$ (i.e. $n, n+1, n-1, ldots$) when in reality we only defined it to apply to a fix $n$ for the sake of the proof.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 19:59
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
You can get away with inducting on just $n$:
$$ begin{align} F(m + n) & = F(m + (n - 1)) + F(m + (n -2))\
& = F(m-1)F(n-1) + F(m)F(n) + F(m-1)F(n-2) + F(m)F(n-1) \
& = F(m-1)[F(n-1) + F(n-2)] + F(m)[F(n)+F(n-1)] \
& = F(m-1)F(n) + F(m)F(n+1)end{align}$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Can you explain in greater detail the steps you took? You already lost me on the very first one. It seems you have somehow replaced $F(n)$ with the recursive definition of the fibonacci sequence (the last formula I listed), but I didn't even know you can split apart the term partially like that. Isn't the $F(m+n)$ to be seen as static, i.e. if $m=2$ and $n = 3$, you have to solve the entire sum $F(5)$, and can't just partially solve the "3 part" of the fibonacci? Hard to explain my issue, I hope you get what I mean.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 17:42
$begingroup$
Hi, using your example: if $m = 2, n = 3$, $n + m = 5$ then $F(5) = F(4) + F(3)$ by the definition of the Fibonacci sequence. Note then that $n + m -1 = 4$ and $n + m - 2 = 3$ which is my first step.
$endgroup$
– ODF
Dec 31 '18 at 17:46
$begingroup$
In the second step I induct on $n$, in the third I just gather like terms and in the final I use the fact that $F(n) = F(n-1) + F(n-2)$ and that $F(n+1) = F(n) + F(n-1)$.
$endgroup$
– ODF
Dec 31 '18 at 17:47
$begingroup$
Alright, I've finally understood your solution; thank you! Just for the record, in order to turn it into an actual proof by induction, I believe you have to proof $F(m+n+1) = F(m-1)cdot F(n+1) + F(m) cdot F(n+2)$ using the very same steps you took.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 18:28
$begingroup$
I must revise myself. I think there's an issue here. In the second line, you would apply the induction precondition. If we are inducting on $n$, that means we can only apply it on an $n$, but not e.g. on an $n-1$. But in your calculations you do apply it on just any $n$, so you basically assume that the precondition already applies for every single $n$ (i.e. $n, n+1, n-1, ldots$) when in reality we only defined it to apply to a fix $n$ for the sake of the proof.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 19:59
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
You can get away with inducting on just $n$:
$$ begin{align} F(m + n) & = F(m + (n - 1)) + F(m + (n -2))\
& = F(m-1)F(n-1) + F(m)F(n) + F(m-1)F(n-2) + F(m)F(n-1) \
& = F(m-1)[F(n-1) + F(n-2)] + F(m)[F(n)+F(n-1)] \
& = F(m-1)F(n) + F(m)F(n+1)end{align}$$
$endgroup$
You can get away with inducting on just $n$:
$$ begin{align} F(m + n) & = F(m + (n - 1)) + F(m + (n -2))\
& = F(m-1)F(n-1) + F(m)F(n) + F(m-1)F(n-2) + F(m)F(n-1) \
& = F(m-1)[F(n-1) + F(n-2)] + F(m)[F(n)+F(n-1)] \
& = F(m-1)F(n) + F(m)F(n+1)end{align}$$
answered Dec 31 '18 at 17:24
ODFODF
1,486510
1,486510
$begingroup$
Can you explain in greater detail the steps you took? You already lost me on the very first one. It seems you have somehow replaced $F(n)$ with the recursive definition of the fibonacci sequence (the last formula I listed), but I didn't even know you can split apart the term partially like that. Isn't the $F(m+n)$ to be seen as static, i.e. if $m=2$ and $n = 3$, you have to solve the entire sum $F(5)$, and can't just partially solve the "3 part" of the fibonacci? Hard to explain my issue, I hope you get what I mean.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 17:42
$begingroup$
Hi, using your example: if $m = 2, n = 3$, $n + m = 5$ then $F(5) = F(4) + F(3)$ by the definition of the Fibonacci sequence. Note then that $n + m -1 = 4$ and $n + m - 2 = 3$ which is my first step.
$endgroup$
– ODF
Dec 31 '18 at 17:46
$begingroup$
In the second step I induct on $n$, in the third I just gather like terms and in the final I use the fact that $F(n) = F(n-1) + F(n-2)$ and that $F(n+1) = F(n) + F(n-1)$.
$endgroup$
– ODF
Dec 31 '18 at 17:47
$begingroup$
Alright, I've finally understood your solution; thank you! Just for the record, in order to turn it into an actual proof by induction, I believe you have to proof $F(m+n+1) = F(m-1)cdot F(n+1) + F(m) cdot F(n+2)$ using the very same steps you took.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 18:28
$begingroup$
I must revise myself. I think there's an issue here. In the second line, you would apply the induction precondition. If we are inducting on $n$, that means we can only apply it on an $n$, but not e.g. on an $n-1$. But in your calculations you do apply it on just any $n$, so you basically assume that the precondition already applies for every single $n$ (i.e. $n, n+1, n-1, ldots$) when in reality we only defined it to apply to a fix $n$ for the sake of the proof.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 19:59
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Can you explain in greater detail the steps you took? You already lost me on the very first one. It seems you have somehow replaced $F(n)$ with the recursive definition of the fibonacci sequence (the last formula I listed), but I didn't even know you can split apart the term partially like that. Isn't the $F(m+n)$ to be seen as static, i.e. if $m=2$ and $n = 3$, you have to solve the entire sum $F(5)$, and can't just partially solve the "3 part" of the fibonacci? Hard to explain my issue, I hope you get what I mean.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 17:42
$begingroup$
Hi, using your example: if $m = 2, n = 3$, $n + m = 5$ then $F(5) = F(4) + F(3)$ by the definition of the Fibonacci sequence. Note then that $n + m -1 = 4$ and $n + m - 2 = 3$ which is my first step.
$endgroup$
– ODF
Dec 31 '18 at 17:46
$begingroup$
In the second step I induct on $n$, in the third I just gather like terms and in the final I use the fact that $F(n) = F(n-1) + F(n-2)$ and that $F(n+1) = F(n) + F(n-1)$.
$endgroup$
– ODF
Dec 31 '18 at 17:47
$begingroup$
Alright, I've finally understood your solution; thank you! Just for the record, in order to turn it into an actual proof by induction, I believe you have to proof $F(m+n+1) = F(m-1)cdot F(n+1) + F(m) cdot F(n+2)$ using the very same steps you took.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 18:28
$begingroup$
I must revise myself. I think there's an issue here. In the second line, you would apply the induction precondition. If we are inducting on $n$, that means we can only apply it on an $n$, but not e.g. on an $n-1$. But in your calculations you do apply it on just any $n$, so you basically assume that the precondition already applies for every single $n$ (i.e. $n, n+1, n-1, ldots$) when in reality we only defined it to apply to a fix $n$ for the sake of the proof.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 19:59
$begingroup$
Can you explain in greater detail the steps you took? You already lost me on the very first one. It seems you have somehow replaced $F(n)$ with the recursive definition of the fibonacci sequence (the last formula I listed), but I didn't even know you can split apart the term partially like that. Isn't the $F(m+n)$ to be seen as static, i.e. if $m=2$ and $n = 3$, you have to solve the entire sum $F(5)$, and can't just partially solve the "3 part" of the fibonacci? Hard to explain my issue, I hope you get what I mean.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 17:42
$begingroup$
Can you explain in greater detail the steps you took? You already lost me on the very first one. It seems you have somehow replaced $F(n)$ with the recursive definition of the fibonacci sequence (the last formula I listed), but I didn't even know you can split apart the term partially like that. Isn't the $F(m+n)$ to be seen as static, i.e. if $m=2$ and $n = 3$, you have to solve the entire sum $F(5)$, and can't just partially solve the "3 part" of the fibonacci? Hard to explain my issue, I hope you get what I mean.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 17:42
$begingroup$
Hi, using your example: if $m = 2, n = 3$, $n + m = 5$ then $F(5) = F(4) + F(3)$ by the definition of the Fibonacci sequence. Note then that $n + m -1 = 4$ and $n + m - 2 = 3$ which is my first step.
$endgroup$
– ODF
Dec 31 '18 at 17:46
$begingroup$
Hi, using your example: if $m = 2, n = 3$, $n + m = 5$ then $F(5) = F(4) + F(3)$ by the definition of the Fibonacci sequence. Note then that $n + m -1 = 4$ and $n + m - 2 = 3$ which is my first step.
$endgroup$
– ODF
Dec 31 '18 at 17:46
$begingroup$
In the second step I induct on $n$, in the third I just gather like terms and in the final I use the fact that $F(n) = F(n-1) + F(n-2)$ and that $F(n+1) = F(n) + F(n-1)$.
$endgroup$
– ODF
Dec 31 '18 at 17:47
$begingroup$
In the second step I induct on $n$, in the third I just gather like terms and in the final I use the fact that $F(n) = F(n-1) + F(n-2)$ and that $F(n+1) = F(n) + F(n-1)$.
$endgroup$
– ODF
Dec 31 '18 at 17:47
$begingroup$
Alright, I've finally understood your solution; thank you! Just for the record, in order to turn it into an actual proof by induction, I believe you have to proof $F(m+n+1) = F(m-1)cdot F(n+1) + F(m) cdot F(n+2)$ using the very same steps you took.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 18:28
$begingroup$
Alright, I've finally understood your solution; thank you! Just for the record, in order to turn it into an actual proof by induction, I believe you have to proof $F(m+n+1) = F(m-1)cdot F(n+1) + F(m) cdot F(n+2)$ using the very same steps you took.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 18:28
$begingroup$
I must revise myself. I think there's an issue here. In the second line, you would apply the induction precondition. If we are inducting on $n$, that means we can only apply it on an $n$, but not e.g. on an $n-1$. But in your calculations you do apply it on just any $n$, so you basically assume that the precondition already applies for every single $n$ (i.e. $n, n+1, n-1, ldots$) when in reality we only defined it to apply to a fix $n$ for the sake of the proof.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 19:59
$begingroup$
I must revise myself. I think there's an issue here. In the second line, you would apply the induction precondition. If we are inducting on $n$, that means we can only apply it on an $n$, but not e.g. on an $n-1$. But in your calculations you do apply it on just any $n$, so you basically assume that the precondition already applies for every single $n$ (i.e. $n, n+1, n-1, ldots$) when in reality we only defined it to apply to a fix $n$ for the sake of the proof.
$endgroup$
– StckXchnge-nub12
Dec 31 '18 at 19:59
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
I won't mention every use of induction. Define $$M:=left(begin{array}{cc}
0 & 1\
1 & 1
end{array}right),,V_{n}:=left(begin{array}{c}
F_{n}\
F_{n+1}
end{array}right)=M^{n}left(begin{array}{c}
0\
1
end{array}right)$$ so $M^{m}=left(begin{array}{cc}
F_{m-1} & F_{m}\
F_{m} & F_{m+1}
end{array}right)$ and $$left(begin{array}{c}
F_{m+n}\
F_{m+n+1}
end{array}right)=M^{m}left(begin{array}{c}
F_{n}\
F_{n+1}
end{array}right)=left(begin{array}{c}
F_{m-1}F_{n}+F_{m}F_{n+1}\
F_{m}F_{n}+F_{m+1}F_{n+1}
end{array}right).$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I won't mention every use of induction. Define $$M:=left(begin{array}{cc}
0 & 1\
1 & 1
end{array}right),,V_{n}:=left(begin{array}{c}
F_{n}\
F_{n+1}
end{array}right)=M^{n}left(begin{array}{c}
0\
1
end{array}right)$$ so $M^{m}=left(begin{array}{cc}
F_{m-1} & F_{m}\
F_{m} & F_{m+1}
end{array}right)$ and $$left(begin{array}{c}
F_{m+n}\
F_{m+n+1}
end{array}right)=M^{m}left(begin{array}{c}
F_{n}\
F_{n+1}
end{array}right)=left(begin{array}{c}
F_{m-1}F_{n}+F_{m}F_{n+1}\
F_{m}F_{n}+F_{m+1}F_{n+1}
end{array}right).$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I won't mention every use of induction. Define $$M:=left(begin{array}{cc}
0 & 1\
1 & 1
end{array}right),,V_{n}:=left(begin{array}{c}
F_{n}\
F_{n+1}
end{array}right)=M^{n}left(begin{array}{c}
0\
1
end{array}right)$$ so $M^{m}=left(begin{array}{cc}
F_{m-1} & F_{m}\
F_{m} & F_{m+1}
end{array}right)$ and $$left(begin{array}{c}
F_{m+n}\
F_{m+n+1}
end{array}right)=M^{m}left(begin{array}{c}
F_{n}\
F_{n+1}
end{array}right)=left(begin{array}{c}
F_{m-1}F_{n}+F_{m}F_{n+1}\
F_{m}F_{n}+F_{m+1}F_{n+1}
end{array}right).$$
$endgroup$
I won't mention every use of induction. Define $$M:=left(begin{array}{cc}
0 & 1\
1 & 1
end{array}right),,V_{n}:=left(begin{array}{c}
F_{n}\
F_{n+1}
end{array}right)=M^{n}left(begin{array}{c}
0\
1
end{array}right)$$ so $M^{m}=left(begin{array}{cc}
F_{m-1} & F_{m}\
F_{m} & F_{m+1}
end{array}right)$ and $$left(begin{array}{c}
F_{m+n}\
F_{m+n+1}
end{array}right)=M^{m}left(begin{array}{c}
F_{n}\
F_{n+1}
end{array}right)=left(begin{array}{c}
F_{m-1}F_{n}+F_{m}F_{n+1}\
F_{m}F_{n}+F_{m+1}F_{n+1}
end{array}right).$$
answered Dec 31 '18 at 17:53
J.G.J.G.
28.1k22844
28.1k22844
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A combinatorial proof (no induction).
Using the representation of the Fibonacci numbers as the numbers of domino coverings the given identity can be shown in a quick and elegant way.
It is known that the number of domino coverings of a $2times N$ grid is $F_{N+1}$. Consider the number of domino coverings of a $2times (m+n-1)$ grid. Any covering can be of two types.
1) The covering has a pair of horizontal dominoes at position $m-1$ and $m$.
Therefore on the left side we have a covering of a $2times (m-2)$ grid
and on the right side we have a covering of a $2times (n-1)$ grid. Therefore the number of such coverings is
$F_{m-1}cdot F_{n}$.
2) The covering can be split into two coverings, one of a $2times (m-1)$ grid and another of a $2times n$ grid.
Therefore the number of such coverings is
$F_{m}cdot F_{n+1}$.
Finally we may conclude that the number of domino coverings of a $2times (m+n-1)$ grid is
$$F_{m+n}=F_{m-1}cdot F_{n}+F_{m}cdot F_{n+1}.$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A combinatorial proof (no induction).
Using the representation of the Fibonacci numbers as the numbers of domino coverings the given identity can be shown in a quick and elegant way.
It is known that the number of domino coverings of a $2times N$ grid is $F_{N+1}$. Consider the number of domino coverings of a $2times (m+n-1)$ grid. Any covering can be of two types.
1) The covering has a pair of horizontal dominoes at position $m-1$ and $m$.
Therefore on the left side we have a covering of a $2times (m-2)$ grid
and on the right side we have a covering of a $2times (n-1)$ grid. Therefore the number of such coverings is
$F_{m-1}cdot F_{n}$.
2) The covering can be split into two coverings, one of a $2times (m-1)$ grid and another of a $2times n$ grid.
Therefore the number of such coverings is
$F_{m}cdot F_{n+1}$.
Finally we may conclude that the number of domino coverings of a $2times (m+n-1)$ grid is
$$F_{m+n}=F_{m-1}cdot F_{n}+F_{m}cdot F_{n+1}.$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A combinatorial proof (no induction).
Using the representation of the Fibonacci numbers as the numbers of domino coverings the given identity can be shown in a quick and elegant way.
It is known that the number of domino coverings of a $2times N$ grid is $F_{N+1}$. Consider the number of domino coverings of a $2times (m+n-1)$ grid. Any covering can be of two types.
1) The covering has a pair of horizontal dominoes at position $m-1$ and $m$.
Therefore on the left side we have a covering of a $2times (m-2)$ grid
and on the right side we have a covering of a $2times (n-1)$ grid. Therefore the number of such coverings is
$F_{m-1}cdot F_{n}$.
2) The covering can be split into two coverings, one of a $2times (m-1)$ grid and another of a $2times n$ grid.
Therefore the number of such coverings is
$F_{m}cdot F_{n+1}$.
Finally we may conclude that the number of domino coverings of a $2times (m+n-1)$ grid is
$$F_{m+n}=F_{m-1}cdot F_{n}+F_{m}cdot F_{n+1}.$$
$endgroup$
A combinatorial proof (no induction).
Using the representation of the Fibonacci numbers as the numbers of domino coverings the given identity can be shown in a quick and elegant way.
It is known that the number of domino coverings of a $2times N$ grid is $F_{N+1}$. Consider the number of domino coverings of a $2times (m+n-1)$ grid. Any covering can be of two types.
1) The covering has a pair of horizontal dominoes at position $m-1$ and $m$.
Therefore on the left side we have a covering of a $2times (m-2)$ grid
and on the right side we have a covering of a $2times (n-1)$ grid. Therefore the number of such coverings is
$F_{m-1}cdot F_{n}$.
2) The covering can be split into two coverings, one of a $2times (m-1)$ grid and another of a $2times n$ grid.
Therefore the number of such coverings is
$F_{m}cdot F_{n+1}$.
Finally we may conclude that the number of domino coverings of a $2times (m+n-1)$ grid is
$$F_{m+n}=F_{m-1}cdot F_{n}+F_{m}cdot F_{n+1}.$$
edited Jan 1 at 14:13
answered Dec 31 '18 at 17:33
Robert ZRobert Z
98.8k1068139
98.8k1068139
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3057874%2fprove-for-the-fibonacci-sequence-fmn-fm-1-cdot-fn-fm-cdot-fn1%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
You actually only need to prove the case $mmapsto m+1$ with $n$ kept constant, since the equation is, in fact, symmetric (replacing $n$ by $n-1$)
$endgroup$
– BAI
Dec 31 '18 at 17:22
$begingroup$
This identity have been here couple of times, for example Showing that an equation holds true with a Fibonacci sequence: $F_{n+m} = F_{n-1}F_m + F_n F_{m+1}$ and Product of consecutive Fibonacci numbers divisibility
$endgroup$
– Sil
Dec 31 '18 at 18:02