Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

What do these new symbols mean ?I can't start this without knowing

  1. Sep 17, 2011 #1
    1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

    [PLAIN]http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4418/unledekp.png [Broken]

    3. The attempt at a solution

    What is the [tex]P^n _{k}[/tex] part thing?

    Someone should probably go over the i) for me too...
    Last edited by a moderator: May 5, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 17, 2011 #2
    The [itex]P_n^k[/itex] is just a symbol. It is a name for a polynomial defined by


    So it's just like we define [itex]P(x)=x^2[/itex]. But now our polynomial depends of n and k.
  4. Sep 17, 2011 #3
    For the i)

    [tex]\sum^{n}_{k=0} \left( \alpha f\left(\frac{k}{n}\right) \binom{n}{k} x^k(1-x)^{n-k} + \beta g\left(\frac{k}{n}\right) \binom{n}{k} x^k(1-x)^{n-k}\right) = \alpha \sum^{n}_{k=0} f\left(\frac{k}{n}\right) \binom{n}{k} x^k(1-x)^{n-k} + \beta \sum^{n}_{k=0} g\left(\frac{k}{n}\right) \binom{n}{k} x^k(1-x)^{n-k}[/tex]

    Summation property??
  5. Sep 17, 2011 #4
    Something is wrong...do I need induction? This was from proof class
  6. Sep 17, 2011 #5
    For (i), you need to start from

    [tex]B_n(\alpha f+\beta g)=\sum_{k=0}^n{(\alpha f+\beta g)(\frac{k}{n})x^k(1-x)^{n-k}}[/tex]
  7. Sep 17, 2011 #6
    What's wrong with what I did...? GO on grill me!!
  8. Sep 17, 2011 #7
    Nothing is wrong, it's all correct, but it's not finished yet.

    You still need to show that the left-hand-side of your post equals

    [tex]B_n(\alpha f+\beta g)[/tex]

    and that the right-hand-side equals

    [tex]\alpha B_n(f)+\beta B_n(g)[/tex]
  9. Sep 17, 2011 #8
    [tex]B_n(\alpha f+\beta g)=\sum_{k=0}^n{(\alpha f+\beta g)(\frac{k}{n})x^k(1-x)^{n-k}} [/tex]

    [tex]= \sum_{k=0}^n{(\alpha f (\frac{k}{n})x^k(1-x)^{n-k}} + \beta g(\frac{k}{n})x^k(1-x)^{n-k} ) = \sum_{k=0}^n{\alpha f (\frac{k}{n})x^k(1-x)^{n-k}} + \sum_{k=0}^n \beta g(\frac{k}{n})x^k(1-x)^{n-k} ) = \alpha B_n(f)+\beta B_n(g)[/tex]

    okay done, got lazy with the long tex
  10. Sep 17, 2011 #9
    Yeah, that looks good!!
  11. Sep 17, 2011 #10
    How do I start ii) then?
  12. Sep 17, 2011 #11
    You need to prove

    [tex]B_n(f)\leq B_n(g)[/tex]

    Start by writing these things out according to the definition of the [itex]B_n[/itex].
  13. Sep 17, 2011 #12
    [tex] \sum^{n}_{k=0} f\left(\frac{k}{n}\right) \binom{n}{k} x^k(1-x)^{n-k} \leq \sum^{n}_{k=0} g\left(\frac{k}{n}\right) \binom{n}{k} x^k(1-x)^{n-k}/tex]

    SOme kinda of cancellations...?
  14. Sep 17, 2011 #13
    Well, you know that

    [tex]f(k/n)\leq g(k/n)[/tex]

    Now try to introduce the terms needed to conclude that [itex]B_nf\leq B_ng[/itex].
  15. Sep 17, 2011 #14
    Can you multiply P to both sides...? I don't know if P is always positive
  16. Sep 17, 2011 #15
    That's the idea.

    Try to prove it then. Prove that [itex]P_k^n(x)[/itex] is positive if [itex]x\in [0,1][/itex]...
  17. Sep 17, 2011 #16
    So I have to prove two things...

    OKay since [tex]x \in [0, 1] \leq 0[/tex], then it doesn't matter what i put in right? Now how do do that in proper English...?
  18. Sep 17, 2011 #17
    This makes no sense to me...
  19. Sep 17, 2011 #18
    I meant to say [tex]x \in [0, 1] \geq 0[/tex]

  20. Sep 17, 2011 #19
    Yeah, that also makes no sense. How can [itex][0,1]\geq 0[/itex]?? [0,1] is a set.
  21. Sep 17, 2011 #20
    OKay I wanted to say that numbers in [0,1] are alll positive, so we never had to worry about odd powers messing up with negative numbers
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook