Connection between cubed binomial and summation formula proof (for squares)

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the proof of the summation formula for consecutive squares, specifically how the equation (k+1)³ = k³ + 3k² + 3k + 1 is derived and its relevance to the proof. Participants clarify that this equation is fundamental in connecting the sum of squares to cubic expressions, emphasizing that it emerges from algebraic manipulation. The reasoning behind using this cubic equation as a starting point is attributed to mathematical intuition and experience with numerical formulas. It is noted that the relationship implies that the sum of squares can be viewed as a cubic function of the sum of integers. Understanding this connection is essential for grasping the proof's logic.
GeoMike
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
I was reading through a proof of the summation formula for a sequence of consecutive squares (12 22 + 32 + ... + n2), and the beginning of the proof states that we should take the formula:
(k+1)3 = k3 + 3k2 + 3k + 1
And take "k = 1,2,3,...,n-1, n" to get n formulas which can then be manipulated into the form n(n+1)(2n+1)/6

I can follow the proof without issue, what I'm a little confused about is where "(k+1)3 = k3 + 3k2 + 3k + 1" comes from. It's just given at the beginning of the proof with no logical explanation as to where it came from. I understand that using it allows us to easily get to the final form -- but is there some logical connection between the cubed binomial (and it's expansion) and the sum of the sequence of squares?

Hopefully what I'm asking makes sense...
-GeoMike-
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think it should be (k+1)^{3}-k^{3} = 3k^{2} + 3k +1. And then take k = 1,2,3, ..., (n-1), n
 
Last edited:
courtrigrad said:
I think it should be (k+1)^{3}-k^{3} = 3k^{2} + 3k +1. And then take k = 1,2,3, ..., (n-1), n

Yes, they subtract k3 from each side in the next step, then take k = 1,2,3,...(n-1),n.

But, what is the process of reasoning that led us to use that equation as a starting point for the proof? For example, if the question had just said "derive a formula for the sum of the sequence of consecutive squares" or "Prove that n(n+1)(2n+1)/6 is a formula for such a sequence" I wouldn't instantly think "Oh yeah, that's easy, I just need to use this cubic equation" -- what process of reasoning would get me there?

-GeoMike-
 
I dunno, it's simply mathematical brilliancy. Basically it's intuition plus lots of work on this kind of problems: numerical formulae.

Daniel.
 
dextercioby said:
I dunno, it's simply mathematical brilliancy. Basically it's intuition plus lots of work on this kind of problems: numerical formulae.

Daniel.


I can live with that. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something really obvious... :-p

-GeoMike-
 
the equation stated to solve the equation (k+1)^3=k^3+3k^2+3k+1 comes from the algebraic proof of 1^2+2^2+3^2+4^2=(1+2+3+4)^3. This also means that 1^2+2^2+3^2+4^2...+n^2=(1+2+3+4...+n)^3. In order to find the summation formula for the square, you need to take the cube.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
761
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K