Please check my proof of sum of n choose k = 2^n

  • Thread starter Thread starter bennyska
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof Sum
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The proof of the sum of binomial coefficients, expressed as (n,0) + (n,1) + (n,2) + ... + (n,n) = 2^n, is validated through the application of the binomial theorem. By substituting x and y with 1 in the equation (x + y)^n, it simplifies to 2^n, confirming the equality. The proof is correct, although it is essential to clarify that n must be a positive integer for the binomial theorem to apply. Additionally, the theorem holds true for any complex number n when utilizing generalized binomial coefficients.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of binomial coefficients, denoted as (n,k)
  • Familiarity with the binomial theorem
  • Knowledge of generalized binomial coefficients
  • Basic algebraic manipulation skills
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the binomial theorem in depth, focusing on its applications and proofs
  • Explore generalized binomial coefficients and their implications for complex numbers
  • Learn about mathematical induction as a proof technique for combinatorial identities
  • Review the properties of binomial series and their derivations
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone interested in combinatorial proofs and the applications of the binomial theorem.

bennyska
Messages
110
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


(here (n,k) reads n choose k)(and again, please excuse that i don't use latex)
claim: (n,0) + (n,1) + (n,2) + ... (n,n) = 2n


Homework Equations



binomial theorem

The Attempt at a Solution


proof: sum(k=0 to n of (n,k)) = sum(k=0 to n of (n,k))*1k*1n-k.
by the binomial theorem, (x + y)n = sum(k=0 to n of (n,k))*xkyn-k, so letting x, y = 1, then (1 + 1)n = 2n = sum(k=0 to n of (n,k))*1k*1n-k = sum(k=0 to n of (n,k)).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks correct, I see nothing wrong with it. (assuming you weren't given a set method such as mathematical induction to use)
 
no. but looking back on it, should i have been a little more rigorous? like being explicitly clear that for the binomial theorem, n has to be a positive integer. it's kind of implied, i guess.
 
The actual proof itself looks valid, you can state the conditions before it though.
 
bennyska said:
no. but looking back on it, should i have been a little more rigorous? like being explicitly clear that for the binomial theorem, n has to be a positive integer. it's kind of implied, i guess.

The theorem in fact remains true for any complex number n if you use generalized binomial coefficients and binomial series. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_series
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K