06-29-2013, 04:18 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-29-2013, 04:21 PM by Guy1234567890.)
Yes, you must show the proposition to be true for both k and k+1 (that wasn't the part I was talking about). However, the assumption is that it does hold for k, and so that step is unnecessary. However, I was just referencing the 3 specific cases, two of which were unnecessary.