Permutations & Combinations: When Objects are Not All Distinct

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating permutations and combinations when objects are not all distinct, specifically from a set of size N composed of parts n1, n2, n3,..., nr. For permutations of size k, the formula is N!/(n1!n2!...nr!) when k equals N. For combinations, while distinct objects use the formula N!/((N-k)!k!), the case with non-distinct objects is more complex. Generating functions are suggested as a method to approach these problems, although extracting specific formulas can be challenging and may not yield an analytic solution. The conversation emphasizes that not all combinatorial problems have straightforward solutions, highlighting the complexity involved.
qbslug
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
How many permutations (when objects are not all distinct) of size k can be created from a set of size N composed of n1, n2,n3,...,nr parts?
When k = N this is easy and is equal to N!/(n1!n2!...nr!)

The following question would be then how many combinations (when objects are not all distinct) of size k can be created from a set of size N composed of n1, n2,n3,...,nr parts?
When all objects are distinct we know that this would be N!/((N-k)!k!)

Looking through the combinatorics section of my statistics book they don't mention these seemingly important situations.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
qbslug said:
How many permutations (when objects are not all distinct) of size k can be created from a set of size N composed of n1, n2,n3,...,nr parts?
When k = N this is easy and is equal to N!/(n1!n2!...nr!)

The following question would be then how many combinations (when objects are not all distinct) of size k can be created from a set of size N composed of n1, n2,n3,...,nr parts?
When all objects are distinct we know that this would be N!/((N-k)!k!)

Looking through the combinatorics section of my statistics book they don't mention these seemingly important situations.

Problems like the two you pose are generally solved using generating functions: exponential generating functions in the case of permutations (your first question) and ordinary generating functions in the case of combinations (your second question). When the problem is sufficiently complicated or general, you may be able to find the generating function which "solves" the problem even though you are not able to get a formula for the "number of ways". There is still value in the generating function in such a case, because you may be able to discover facts about the problem that are not obvious, such as recurrences or asymptotic behavior of the solution.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generating_function

The wikipedia article also has links to additional information.
 
So there is no general solution for this problem?? How can this be?!
 
There is a general solution in so far as it is easy to write down the generating functions, but unfortunately extracting the "number of ways" formula from the generating functions (in the general case) is so complicated that it's not really worth the trouble. For specific problems you can often use the generating function method to get a relatively simple answer.

Moral: don't expect an analytic solution to every combinatorics problem. Some of them are just too hard. It's a little like "The Hunting of the Snark": some problems are Snarks, some are Boojums. You don't really know which is which until you try to solve one.
 
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