I Conflicting Conventions for Bernoulli Numbers?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the differing conventions for Bernoulli numbers as outlined in the Wikipedia article. It highlights that the two conventions differ only at m=1, with the implication that for m>1, the expressions are equivalent despite additional terms in one expression. Participants clarify that the cancellation of terms is indeed valid due to the properties of binomial coefficients following Pascal's triangle. This understanding reassures that the perceived complexity is not a misinterpretation. The conversation concludes with confirmation of the mathematical principles involved.
nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,748
Reaction score
243
TL;DR Summary
In the Wiki article on Bernoulli numbers, it gives two expressions that, if I understand correctly, are supposed to be equal except at one point. But I am not sure I understand it correctly
In the Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernoulli_number on Bernoulli’s numbers, it explains that there are two conventions which differ only at m=1. Then it says…

Bernoulli1.PNG


Under “explicit definitions”, it gives, for m>1

Bernoulli2.PNG


So, it seems pretty straightforward that they are saying that (except for m=1) these two expressions are equal, but that all the extra terms in the second expression (+) not included in the first one (-) would cancel out seems so incredible that I think I might be misinterpreting something. Am I?

Thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The expansion of ##(v+1)^m## follows Pascal's triangle, hence binomial coefficients, so yes, the terms can cancel out.
 
Thanks, DrClaude
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
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...
Back
Top