What will the following formula go ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pattielli
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on simplifying a formula involving binomial coefficients. Participants analyze specific cases for n=0 to n=4, revealing a pattern that suggests the formula simplifies to n!/P, where P is the product of terms (x)(x+1)...(x+n). They note that the coefficients of certain powers of x in the expansion lead to insights about alternating sums of binomial coefficients. The conversation highlights collaborative problem-solving and learning through shared insights. Overall, the simplification process illustrates the relationship between binomial coefficients and polynomial expressions.
Pattielli
Messages
296
Reaction score
0
Can you point out how to simplify the following formula ?

\frac{C^0_n}{x}-\frac{C^1_n}{x+1}+...+(-1)^n\frac{C^n_n}{x+n}

Thank you
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
your Cs are binomial coeffs?

have you worked itout for the cases n=0,1,2? what did you get there? is there a pattern you can see?
 
Thanks Matt for your help

Yes, they are binomial coeffs.
I tried till n reaches 4 and I figured it out...
n=0 \frac{C^0_0}{x}=\frac{1}{x}
n=1 \frac{C^0_1}{x}-\frac{C^1_1}{x+1}=\frac{1}{x(x+1)}
n=2, \frac{C^0_2}{x}-\frac{C^1_2}{x+1}+\frac{C^2_2}{x+2}=\frac{1}{x}-\frac{2}{x+1}+\frac{1}{x+2}=\frac{2}{x(x+1)(x+2)}
n=3, \frac{C^0_3}{x}-\frac{C^1_3}{x+1}+\frac{C^2_3}{x+2}-\frac{C^3_3}{x+3}=\frac{6}{x(x+1)(x+2)(x+3)}
n=4, \frac{C^0_4}{x}-\frac{C^1_4}{x+1}+\frac{C^2_4}{x+2}-\frac{C^3_4}{x+4}+\frac{C^4_4}{x+4}=\frac{24}{x(x+1)(x+2)(x+3)(x+4)}

So I think it will be \frac{n!}{x(x+1)...(x+n)}

Thank Matt so very much for your suggestions, :smile:
 
Last edited:
that seems about right:

let P=x(x+1)(x+2)...(x+n) and let P(r) be P, but where you omit the factor (x+r)

then you want to work out
{P(0) -P(1)nC1 + P(2)nC2 ...)/P

if you work out the coeff of x^s in the bracket you see lots of things happening:

x^(n-1) has coeff the alternating sum of all the binom coeffs, so it's zero,
x^0 is just the constant term in P(0), cos all the other terms P(s) have a factor of x in them. you should tidy up that to work for all coeffs
 
matt grime said:
that seems about right:

let P=x(x+1)(x+2)...(x+n) and let P(r) be P, but where you omit the factor (x+r)

then you want to work out
{P(0) -P(1)nC1 + P(2)nC2 ...)/P

if you work out the coeff of x^s in the bracket you see lots of things happening:

x^(n-1) has coeff the alternating sum of all the binom coeffs, so it's zero,
x^0 is just the constant term in P(0), cos all the other terms P(s) have a factor of x in them. you should tidy up that to work for all coeffs
Oh Well, That is really great, I have just learned new things from you, Matt. :sm:

Thank Matt very much...
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top