Proving the Max Binomial Coefficient for n and r

gimpy
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Hi, I am having a little trouble with this proof:

Let n be a positive integer. What is the largest binomial coefficient C(n,r) where r is a nonnegative integer less than or equal to n? Prove your answer is correct.

So let r = \lfloor{\frac{n}{2}\rfloor} or r = \lceil{\frac{n}{2}\rceil} then \left( \begin{array}{c} n \\ r \end{array} \right) is the largest binomial coefficient.

Now I am having trouble with the proof. Where do i begin?
Maybe something like this?

\left( \begin{array}{c} n \\ \lfloor \frac{n}{2} \rfloor \end{array} \right) = \frac{n!}{\left(\lfloor \frac{n}{2} \rfloor \right)! \left(n - \lfloor \frac{n}{2} \rfloor \right)!} = ...

Am i on the right track?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Yes you are on the right track. There are two cases depending on whether n is odd or even. Obviously the middle values are the biggest, just think of the Pascal triangle. Then I suppose you would prove that (in the even case) C(n,n/2) > C(n,r) for r < n and r not equal n/2. Consider writing n as 2m, so n/2 = m, and splitting out the facors: C(n,m) = n(n-1)...(m+1)/m(m-1)...1 compared to C(n,r) = n(n-1)...r/(n-r)(n-r-1)...1, and match factors.
 
you can proceed as follows:

note that \binom{n}{r}=\binom{n}{n-r} and that it thus suffices to show that the coeffs for r=0 to [n/2] (integral part) are increasing.

This follows from a *careful* induction argument (it's best to have two base cases going for n=2 and 3 say).
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top