Is the General Binomial Coefficient for Any Rational Value Always Defined as 1?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the General Binomial Coefficient for rational values, particularly focusing on the case when the lower index \( r \) is zero. Participants explore the mathematical implications of this scenario, including the evaluation of the empty product and the definitions involved.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how the General Binomial Coefficient is evaluated when \( r = 0 \), noting that the expression leads to an empty product.
  • Another participant seeks clarification on the meaning of \( n \) in the context of the binomial coefficient.
  • A correction is made regarding the variables used in the equations, clarifying that \( n \) is the order of the coefficient and can be a rational number, while \( r \) is a non-negative integer.
  • One participant suggests using the standard binomial coefficient expression \( n!/[r!(n-r)!] \) as a solution for when \( r = 0 \), stating that it simplifies to 1.
  • Another participant counters that the standard expression only applies to positive integers and expresses a desire for a direct evaluation method for the original generalized expression.
  • A later reply asserts that the second equation can be evaluated directly as \( 1/0! \) times an empty product, which is defined to be 1.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the evaluation of the General Binomial Coefficient when \( r = 0 \). Some argue that it can be evaluated directly, while others seek a more elegant explanation or method. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the most appropriate approach.

Contextual Notes

There is a lack of consensus on the definitions and evaluations of the binomial coefficient in this context, particularly regarding the treatment of the empty product and the applicability of standard definitions to rational values.

Galadirith
Messages
107
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone, I have been having a problem with the General Binomial Coefficient for any rational value:

[tex] \left( <br /> \begin{array}{c}<br /> n\\<br /> r\end{array}<br /> \right)<br /> = \frac{1}{r!}\prod_{i=0}^{r-1} (r-i)[/tex]

Now this works fine except when r=0. so 0! is defined to be 1 so the coefficient of the product of the series is 1, but then the cap PI would read:

[tex] \left( <br /> \begin{array}{c}<br /> n\\<br /> 0\end{array}<br /> \right)<br /> = \frac{1}{0!}\prod_{i=0}^{-1} (r-i)[/tex]

how can that possibly be evaluated, is there a mathematical reason or is it more defined to be 1. I know that this somehow mean the empty product which is defined to be 1, but how is this the empty product. Thanks Guys :-)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Galadirith said:
Hi everyone, I have been having a problem with the General Binomial Coefficient for any rational value:

[tex] \left( <br /> \begin{array}{c}<br /> n\\<br /> r\end{array}<br /> \right)<br /> = \frac{1}{r!}\prod_{i=0}^{r-1} (r-i)[/tex]
What is "n" supposed to mean here?

Now this works fine except when r=0. so 0! is defined to be 1 so the coefficient of the product of the series is 1, but then the cap PI would read:

[tex] \left( <br /> \begin{array}{c}<br /> n\\<br /> 0\end{array}<br /> \right)<br /> = \frac{1}{0!}\prod_{i=0}^{-1} (r-i)[/tex]

how can that possibly be evaluated, is there a mathematical reason or is it more defined to be 1. I know that this somehow mean the empty product which is defined to be 1, but how is this the empty product. Thanks Guys :-)
 
Sorry HallsofIvy, i mucked up my latex there a little, equation one should be :

[tex] <br /> \left( <br /> \begin{array}{c}<br /> n\\<br /> r\end{array}<br /> \right)<br /> = \frac{1}{r!}\prod_{i=0}^{r-1} (n-i)<br /> [/tex]

and equation 2 should be :

[tex] <br /> \left( <br /> \begin{array}{c}<br /> n\\<br /> 0\end{array}<br /> \right)<br /> = \frac{1}{0!}\prod_{i=0}^{-1} (n-i)<br /> [/tex]

sorry about that, i typed r instead of n at the very end. my variables n are r are :

n, the order of the coefficient n ∈ [tex]\mathbb{Q}[/tex] and r ∈ [tex]\mathbb{N}_0[/tex]. (in fairness I think this can be expanded so that n is an element of the complex numbers, but I am not worring about that now)
 
A simple way out of this dilemna is to write the comb. expression as n!/[r!(n-r)!]. When r=0, you will simply have 1/0! = 1.
 
thank you mathman, however in this situation that actually doesn't work, using the expression you suggested only works with integer values of n that are greater than 0 or n ∈ [tex]\mathbb{Z}^+[/tex], I have tried to find a way to adapt the expression you suggested but there is no way, (well there is a way but you end up with the equations from my first post :-)), that I have found at least and I don't think there is one. I could obviously use your expression which is the standard binomial coefficient definition with my original one which is the generalized binomial coefficient and define the coefficient piecewise, but that seem quite un-elegant, and that's not my question, there must be an explanation of how to evaluate my second equation, but Thank you for you suggestion though mathman.

EDIT: Well infact I do know that they are just rearrangements of one another, but still there must be a direct way to evaluate my second equation as apposed to rearrange it, it just seems unusual that the equation is fine to use for every value of r except r=0.
 
I don't see the problem with the second equation; I think it can simply be evaluated directly. It's a constant: 1/0! times an empty product = 1. prod(i=0, x, ...) = 1 for all x < 0.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K