Bernoulli's inequality

From HandWiki
Short description: Inequality about exponentiations of 1+x
An illustration of Bernoulli's inequality, with the graphs of y=(1+x)r and y=1+rx shown in red and blue respectively. Here, r=3.

In mathematics, Bernoulli's inequality (named after Jacob Bernoulli) is an inequality that approximates exponentiations of 1+x. It is often employed in real analysis. It has several useful variants:[1]

Integer exponent

  • Case 1: (1+x)r1+rx for every integer r1 and real number x1. The inequality is strict if x0 and r2.
  • Case 2: (1+x)r1+rx for every integer r0 and every real number x2.[2]
  • Case 3: (1+x)r1+rx for every even integer r0 and every real number x.

Real exponent

  • (1+x)r1+rx for every real number r1 and x1. The inequality is strict if x0 and r1.
  • (1+x)r1+rx for every real number 0r1 and x1.

History

Jacob Bernoulli first published the inequality in his treatise "Positiones Arithmeticae de Seriebus Infinitis" (Basel, 1689), where he used the inequality often.[3]

According to Joseph E. Hofmann, Über die Exercitatio Geometrica des M. A. Ricci (1963), p. 177, the inequality is actually due to Sluse in his Mesolabum (1668 edition), Chapter IV "De maximis & minimis".[3]

Proof for integer exponent

The first case has a simple inductive proof:

Suppose the statement is true for r=k:

(1+x)k1+kx.

Then it follows that

(1+x)k+1=(1+x)k(1+x)(1+kx)(1+x)=1+kx+x+kx2=1+x(k+1)+kx21+(k+1)x

Bernoulli's inequality can be proved for case 2, in which r is a non-negative integer and x2, using mathematical induction in the following form:

  • we prove the inequality for r{0,1},
  • from validity for some r we deduce validity for r+2.

For r=0,

(1+x)01+0x

is equivalent to 11 which is true.

Similarly, for r=1 we have

(1+x)r=1+x1+x=1+rx.

Now suppose the statement is true for r=k:

(1+x)k1+kx.

Then it follows that

(1+x)k+2=(1+x)k(1+x)2(1+kx)(1+2x+x2) by hypothesis and (1+x)20=1+2x+x2+kx+2kx2+kx3=1+(k+2)x+kx2(x+2)+x21+(k+2)x

since x20 as well as x+20. By the modified induction we conclude the statement is true for every non-negative integer r.

By noting that if x<2, then 1+rx is negative gives case 3.

Generalizations

Generalization of exponent

The exponent r can be generalized to an arbitrary real number as follows: if x>1, then

(1+x)r1+rx

for r0 or 1, and

(1+x)r1+rx

for 0r1.

This generalization can be proved by comparing derivatives. The strict versions of these inequalities require x0 and r0,1.

Generalization of base

Instead of (1+x)n the inequality holds also in the form (1+x1)(1+x2)(1+xr)1+x1+x2++xr where x1,x2,,xr are real numbers, all greater than 1, all with the same sign. Bernoulli's inequality is a special case when x1=x2==xr=x. This generalized inequality can be proved by mathematical induction.

Proof

In the first step we take n=1. In this case the inequality 1+x11+x1 is obviously true.

In the second step we assume validity of the inequality for r numbers and deduce validity for r+1 numbers.

We assume that(1+x1)(1+x2)(1+xr)1+x1+x2++xris valid. After multiplying both sides with a positive number (xr+1+1) we get:

(1+x1)(1+x2)(1+xr)(1+xr+1)(1+x1+x2++xr)(1+xr+1)(1+x1+x2++xr)1+(1+x1+x2++xr)xr+1(1+x1+x2++xr)+xr+1+x1xr+1+x2xr+1++xrxr+1

As x1,x2,xr,xr+1 all have the same sign, the products x1xr+1,x2xr+1,xrxr+1 are all positive numbers. So the quantity on the right-hand side can be bounded as follows:(1+x1+x2++xr)+xr+1+x1xr+1+x2xr+1++xrxr+11+x1+x2++xr+xr+1,what was to be shown.

The following inequality estimates the r-th power of 1+x from the other side. For any real numbers x and r with r>0, one has

(1+x)rerx,

where e= 2.718.... This may be proved using the inequality (1+1/k)k<e.

Alternative form

An alternative form of Bernoulli's inequality for t1 and 0x1 is:

(1x)t1xt.

This can be proved (for any integer t) by using the formula for geometric series: (using y=1x)

t=1+1++11+y+y2++yt1=1yt1y,

or equivalently xt1(1x)t.

Alternative proofs

Arithmetic and geometric means

An elementary proof for 0r1 and x ≥ -1 can be given using weighted AM-GM.

Let λ1,λ2 be two non-negative real constants. By weighted AM-GM on 1,1+x with weights λ1,λ2 respectively, we get

λ11+λ2(1+x)λ1+λ2(1+x)λ2λ1+λ2.

Note that

λ11+λ2(1+x)λ1+λ2=λ1+λ2+λ2xλ1+λ2=1+λ2λ1+λ2x

and

(1+x)λ2λ1+λ2=(1+x)λ2λ1+λ2,

so our inequality is equivalent to

1+λ2λ1+λ2x(1+x)λ2λ1+λ2.

After substituting r=λ2λ1+λ2 (bearing in mind that this implies 0r1) our inequality turns into

1+rx(1+x)r

which is Bernoulli's inequality.

Geometric series

Bernoulli's inequality

(1+x)r1+rx

 

 

 

 

(1)

is equivalent to

(1+x)r1rx0,

 

 

 

 

(2)

and by the formula for geometric series (using y = 1 + x) we get

(1+x)r1=yr1=(k=0r1yk)(y1)=(k=0r1(1+x)k)x

 

 

 

 

(3)

which leads to

(1+x)r1rx=((k=0r1(1+x)k)r)x=(k=0r1((1+x)k1))x0.

 

 

 

 

(4)

Now if x0 then by monotony of the powers each summand (1+x)k1=(1+x)k1k0, and therefore their sum is greater 0 and hence the product on the LHS of (4).

If 0x2 then by the same arguments 1(1+x)k and thus all addends (1+x)k1 are non-positive and hence so is their sum. Since the product of two non-positive numbers is non-negative, we get again

Binomial theorem

One can prove Bernoulli's inequality for x ≥ 0 using the binomial theorem. It is true trivially for r = 0, so suppose r is a positive integer. Then (1+x)r=1+rx+(r2)x2+...+(rr)xr. Clearly (r2)x2+...+(rr)xr0, and hence (1+x)r1+rx as required.

Using convexity

For 0x1 the function h(α)=(1+x)α is strictly convex. Therefore for 0<α<1 holds

(1+x)α=h(α)=h((1α)0+α1)<(1α)h(0)+αh(1)=1+αx

and the reversed inequality is valid for α<0 and α>1.

Notes

References