How many combinations can be formed from 5 binary digits?

  • Thread starter Thread starter otto
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Combinatorics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating combinations formed from 5 binary digits, specifically exploring the relationship between binomial coefficients and their summation. The user attempts to prove that the sum of combinations from 0 to n equals 2^n, referencing Pascal's identity. A challenge arises when handling the case where k equals 0, as it complicates the summation. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding binomial coefficients and their implications in combinatorial proofs. Ultimately, the total number of combinations from 5 binary digits is 32, as each digit can independently be either 0 or 1.
otto
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
So look at what I've done:
<br /> {n+1 \choose k} = \frac {(n+1)!} {(n+1-k)! \cdot k!} = \frac {(n+1)\cdot n!}{(n-(k-1))!\cdot k \cdot (k-1)!}<br /><br /> =<br /> \frac {(n+1)}{k} \cdot<br /> <br /> \frac { n!}{(n-(k-1))!\cdot (k-1)!} =<br /> <br /> \frac {(n+1)}{k} <br /> <br /> \cdot {n \choose k-1}<br /> <br />
oops I accidentally posted this before I finished my calculations, please ignore this until I've finished it. Thanks

[edit] So Yea, that's it. Thing is, somethings wrong (try plugging numbers into it). Anyways, I need to figure out what I did wrong. This is just part of a massive can of worms. I am trying to figure out the proof for: \sum\limits_{i=1}^n {n \choose k} = 2^n<br />
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Pascals identity to be exact. I've read some "proofs" if you can call them that, but they were rather not helpful. math stack exchange.

When I replace my summation from k=0 to n, with the combinatorics: <br /> <br /> \sum_{k=0}^n{n+1 \choose k} =<br /> <br /> \sum_{k=0}^n {n \choose k} +{n \choose k-1} <br /> <br /> I have the problem that k-1 will equal -1 in the first iteration of the summation. don't know how to fix this.
 
otto said:
I am trying to figure out the proof for: <br /> <br /> <br /> \sum\limits_{i=1}^n {n \choose k} = 2^n<br />

The lower limit of the sum should be k=0 because i isn't present in the combinatoric and for reasons you'll eventually find out, it should start at 0.


So you want to prove
<br /> \sum\limits_{k=0}^n {n \choose k} = 2^n<br />

then simply notice that the binomial expansion is

(a+b)^n = \sum\limits_{k=0}^n{n\choose k}a^{n-k}b^k

So for what values of a and b is

\sum\limits_{k=0}^n{n\choose k}a^{n-k}b^k\equiv \sum\limits_{k=0}^n {n \choose k}
 
otto said:
Pascals identity to be exact. I've read some "proofs" if you can call them that, but they were rather not helpful. math stack exchange.

When I replace my summation from k=0 to n, with the combinatorics: <br /> <br /> \sum_{k=0}^n{n+1 \choose k} =<br /> <br /> \sum_{k=0}^n {n \choose k} +{n \choose k-1}<br /> <br /> I have the problem that k-1 will equal -1 in the first iteration of the summation. don't know how to fix this.

The problem here is that ##\binom{n+1}k=\binom nk+\binom n{k-1}## only for k>0; if k=0 then it's just ##\binom nk##, as both are 1. I think the convention is often to let ##\binom n{-1}=0##; then ##\binom{n+1}k=\binom nk+\binom n{k-1}## even when k=0.
 
You are right that the proof by induction approach can turn into a can of worms.
Notice that <br /> \sum\limits_{k=0}^n {n \choose k}<br /> is the total number of ways that any number of items (including 0 and n) can be selected from n items.

If we indicate whether an item is selected or not by 1 or 0, respectively, and put the 1's and 0's in order, we can represent any set of selected items.

For instance, starting with n=5 items, 10110 = select first, don't select second, select third, select fourth, don't select fifth, represents one way of selecting 3 of the 5. Now, how many zero/one patterns can we get from 5 binary digits?
 
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