Calculating a Finite Series: Finding Symmetry and Inductive Formulas

  • Thread starter Thread starter Latrace
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Finite Series
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the finite sum \(\sum_{i=1}^{n-1}i^{\alpha}(n-i)^{\beta}\) for natural numbers \(\alpha\), \(\beta\), and \(n\). The user, Latrace, has attempted to derive an inductive formula by evaluating the sum for small values of \(n\) but found no significant results. The symmetry of the series is noted, as it can also be expressed as \(\sum_{i=1}^{n-1}i^{\beta}(n-i)^{\alpha}\). Ultimately, the user seeks to understand the behavior of the sum as \(n\) becomes large, approximating it to \((n-1)^{\beta} + (n-1)^{\alpha}\). The discussion highlights the challenges in finding a general formula for the series.
Latrace
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I would love some help on calculating the following sum for \alpha, \beta \in \mathbb{N} and n \in \mathbb{N} \backslash \{0\}:

\displaystyle\sum_{i=1}^{n-1}i^{\alpha}(n-i)^{\beta}.

Thanks in advance,
Latrace
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What did you already try to solve this problem?
 
(n \geq 2, of course) I tried to find an inductive formula by setting n = 2, n = 3 and n = 4, but don't find anything interesting. Of course we already knew that the thing is symmetric, symbolically it is also \displaystyle\sum_{i=1}^{n-1}i^{\beta}(n-i)^{\alpha}, but that's about all I find when I try to find an inductive formula. I think now that this might be the easiest way to express the series.
What I eventually need is the behavior for large n, but that's \sim (n-1)^{\beta} + (n-1)^{\alpha}. I came across this when I wanted to calculate \displaystyle\int_{0}^{1}x^m \mathrm{d}x for m \geq 1 explicitally using the Riemann sum.
 
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...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
859
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
125
Views
19K
Back
Top