What is wrong with my summation formula?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DerekZ10
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula Summation
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on finding a general formula for the number of onto (surjective) functions from a set M to a set N. The user is attempting to verify their formula against a problem from Chegg but is encountering discrepancies. They realize that a critical error in their equation involves mislabeling variables, specifically confusing (m-k) with (n-k). After correcting this mistake, they confirm that their non-iterative equation was accurate. The conversation emphasizes the importance of careful variable management in mathematical formulations.
DerekZ10
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Im trying to find a general formula I can store in my calculator that can find the number of onto (surjective) functions exists for a relation of when M is mapped to N.

I can't seem to find a nice formula for it, but based on the below material I will show you what I have developed.

From: Discrete Mathemeatics and Its Applications 7th Edition Rosen pg. 561
46rbw7h.png
From: Discrete Mathemeatics and Its Applications 7th Edition Rosen pg. 512
UY3OIud.png


Random Chegg Problem from Google Search I'm using to verify with:
wJUOwNS.png
Here is what I've formed, written out:
NqrU3l3.jpg


In the TI nSpire CX CAS, it's written like this:
iwIkElK.jpg


And as you can see, the chegg problem I'm trying to verify it with doesn't match!
But I think it should! If I manually iterate the function like so:

gyDYmtH.jpg
The values are correct and what Chegg is showing. What have I done wrong in my equation?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Did you check that your summation formula matches the version that doesn't use sigma notation? i.e are all your ##m##s and ##n##s where they're supposed to be?
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Wow, good call! I don't know how I constantly was missing that the (m-k) portion that should have been (n-k). And I even had it right in the non iterative equation.
 
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...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top