Prove $sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}={n+2choose m+2}$ [closed]
How can I prove for $m,nge0$:
$$sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}={n+2choose m+2}$$
I know you can start both sums from $m$ because every value below is zero but I am getting stuck trying to get algebraic proof.
combinatorics
closed as off-topic by Jean-Claude Arbaut, Alexander Gruber♦ Dec 4 '18 at 3:45
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – Jean-Claude Arbaut, Alexander Gruber
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
add a comment |
How can I prove for $m,nge0$:
$$sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}={n+2choose m+2}$$
I know you can start both sums from $m$ because every value below is zero but I am getting stuck trying to get algebraic proof.
combinatorics
closed as off-topic by Jean-Claude Arbaut, Alexander Gruber♦ Dec 4 '18 at 3:45
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – Jean-Claude Arbaut, Alexander Gruber
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
I'm not sure if i got the question right. Is m a number set beforehand? If so, for cases when m > 0, I'm not quite sure whether $0 choose 1$ is defined or in general $n choose m$ for m greater than n is defined. Shouldn't the lower bound of the sum be m?
– Ofya
Dec 3 '18 at 21:41
@Ofya It's typical to define $binom{n}{m}$ to be $0$ when $m > n$.
– Austin Mohr
Dec 3 '18 at 21:44
1
@Austin thanks, so it actually doesn't make a difference whether the lower bound of the sum is 0 or m
– Ofya
Dec 3 '18 at 21:45
add a comment |
How can I prove for $m,nge0$:
$$sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}={n+2choose m+2}$$
I know you can start both sums from $m$ because every value below is zero but I am getting stuck trying to get algebraic proof.
combinatorics
How can I prove for $m,nge0$:
$$sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}={n+2choose m+2}$$
I know you can start both sums from $m$ because every value below is zero but I am getting stuck trying to get algebraic proof.
combinatorics
combinatorics
edited Dec 3 '18 at 20:56
Jean-Claude Arbaut
14.7k63464
14.7k63464
asked Dec 3 '18 at 20:52
Idan Daniel
315
315
closed as off-topic by Jean-Claude Arbaut, Alexander Gruber♦ Dec 4 '18 at 3:45
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – Jean-Claude Arbaut, Alexander Gruber
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
closed as off-topic by Jean-Claude Arbaut, Alexander Gruber♦ Dec 4 '18 at 3:45
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – Jean-Claude Arbaut, Alexander Gruber
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
I'm not sure if i got the question right. Is m a number set beforehand? If so, for cases when m > 0, I'm not quite sure whether $0 choose 1$ is defined or in general $n choose m$ for m greater than n is defined. Shouldn't the lower bound of the sum be m?
– Ofya
Dec 3 '18 at 21:41
@Ofya It's typical to define $binom{n}{m}$ to be $0$ when $m > n$.
– Austin Mohr
Dec 3 '18 at 21:44
1
@Austin thanks, so it actually doesn't make a difference whether the lower bound of the sum is 0 or m
– Ofya
Dec 3 '18 at 21:45
add a comment |
I'm not sure if i got the question right. Is m a number set beforehand? If so, for cases when m > 0, I'm not quite sure whether $0 choose 1$ is defined or in general $n choose m$ for m greater than n is defined. Shouldn't the lower bound of the sum be m?
– Ofya
Dec 3 '18 at 21:41
@Ofya It's typical to define $binom{n}{m}$ to be $0$ when $m > n$.
– Austin Mohr
Dec 3 '18 at 21:44
1
@Austin thanks, so it actually doesn't make a difference whether the lower bound of the sum is 0 or m
– Ofya
Dec 3 '18 at 21:45
I'm not sure if i got the question right. Is m a number set beforehand? If so, for cases when m > 0, I'm not quite sure whether $0 choose 1$ is defined or in general $n choose m$ for m greater than n is defined. Shouldn't the lower bound of the sum be m?
– Ofya
Dec 3 '18 at 21:41
I'm not sure if i got the question right. Is m a number set beforehand? If so, for cases when m > 0, I'm not quite sure whether $0 choose 1$ is defined or in general $n choose m$ for m greater than n is defined. Shouldn't the lower bound of the sum be m?
– Ofya
Dec 3 '18 at 21:41
@Ofya It's typical to define $binom{n}{m}$ to be $0$ when $m > n$.
– Austin Mohr
Dec 3 '18 at 21:44
@Ofya It's typical to define $binom{n}{m}$ to be $0$ when $m > n$.
– Austin Mohr
Dec 3 '18 at 21:44
1
1
@Austin thanks, so it actually doesn't make a difference whether the lower bound of the sum is 0 or m
– Ofya
Dec 3 '18 at 21:45
@Austin thanks, so it actually doesn't make a difference whether the lower bound of the sum is 0 or m
– Ofya
Dec 3 '18 at 21:45
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
A formula issued from Pascal Triangle:
$${ichoose j} = {i-1choose j-1}+{i-1choose j} = {i-1choose j-1}+{i-2choose j-1}+{i-2choose j} = ...$$
$${ichoose j} = sum_{k=j-1}^{i-1}{kchoose j-1}$$
Then the result is obtained by applying this formula twice:
$$sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}= sum_{i=0}^n{i+1choose m+1} = {n+2choose m+2}$$
add a comment |
There's also a nice combinatorial proof here. Given $n+2$ distinct apples in a line, how many ways can I choose $m+2$ of them? The right-hand side clearly counts this directly, so we focus our attention on the left-hand side.
Number the apples $1, 2, dots, n+2$. Our process of choosing $m+2$ apples is as follows:
- Pick $0 leq i leq n$, and select apple $i+2$.
- Pick $0 leq j leq i$, and select apple $j+1$
- Pick $m$ apples among those ranging from $1$ to $j$.
This gives the summation on the left-hand-side; to see that it also counts exactly the ways to choose $m+2$ apples, note that this procedure simply picks the two apples with highest labels first, and then picks the other $m$.
add a comment |
Let $[x^m] f(x)$ denote the coefficient of $x^m$ in the expansion of $f(x)$.
$$
sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}=[x^m]sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{(x+1)^j}
= [x^m]sum_{i=0}^n{frac{(x+1)^{i+1}-1}{x}}= [x^{m+1}]sum_{i=0}^n(x+1)^{i+1}
= [x^{m+1}]frac{(x+1)^{n+2}-(x+1)}{x}=binom{n+2}{m+2}
$$
$blacksquare$
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
A formula issued from Pascal Triangle:
$${ichoose j} = {i-1choose j-1}+{i-1choose j} = {i-1choose j-1}+{i-2choose j-1}+{i-2choose j} = ...$$
$${ichoose j} = sum_{k=j-1}^{i-1}{kchoose j-1}$$
Then the result is obtained by applying this formula twice:
$$sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}= sum_{i=0}^n{i+1choose m+1} = {n+2choose m+2}$$
add a comment |
A formula issued from Pascal Triangle:
$${ichoose j} = {i-1choose j-1}+{i-1choose j} = {i-1choose j-1}+{i-2choose j-1}+{i-2choose j} = ...$$
$${ichoose j} = sum_{k=j-1}^{i-1}{kchoose j-1}$$
Then the result is obtained by applying this formula twice:
$$sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}= sum_{i=0}^n{i+1choose m+1} = {n+2choose m+2}$$
add a comment |
A formula issued from Pascal Triangle:
$${ichoose j} = {i-1choose j-1}+{i-1choose j} = {i-1choose j-1}+{i-2choose j-1}+{i-2choose j} = ...$$
$${ichoose j} = sum_{k=j-1}^{i-1}{kchoose j-1}$$
Then the result is obtained by applying this formula twice:
$$sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}= sum_{i=0}^n{i+1choose m+1} = {n+2choose m+2}$$
A formula issued from Pascal Triangle:
$${ichoose j} = {i-1choose j-1}+{i-1choose j} = {i-1choose j-1}+{i-2choose j-1}+{i-2choose j} = ...$$
$${ichoose j} = sum_{k=j-1}^{i-1}{kchoose j-1}$$
Then the result is obtained by applying this formula twice:
$$sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}= sum_{i=0}^n{i+1choose m+1} = {n+2choose m+2}$$
edited Dec 3 '18 at 21:58
answered Dec 3 '18 at 21:50
Damien
50714
50714
add a comment |
add a comment |
There's also a nice combinatorial proof here. Given $n+2$ distinct apples in a line, how many ways can I choose $m+2$ of them? The right-hand side clearly counts this directly, so we focus our attention on the left-hand side.
Number the apples $1, 2, dots, n+2$. Our process of choosing $m+2$ apples is as follows:
- Pick $0 leq i leq n$, and select apple $i+2$.
- Pick $0 leq j leq i$, and select apple $j+1$
- Pick $m$ apples among those ranging from $1$ to $j$.
This gives the summation on the left-hand-side; to see that it also counts exactly the ways to choose $m+2$ apples, note that this procedure simply picks the two apples with highest labels first, and then picks the other $m$.
add a comment |
There's also a nice combinatorial proof here. Given $n+2$ distinct apples in a line, how many ways can I choose $m+2$ of them? The right-hand side clearly counts this directly, so we focus our attention on the left-hand side.
Number the apples $1, 2, dots, n+2$. Our process of choosing $m+2$ apples is as follows:
- Pick $0 leq i leq n$, and select apple $i+2$.
- Pick $0 leq j leq i$, and select apple $j+1$
- Pick $m$ apples among those ranging from $1$ to $j$.
This gives the summation on the left-hand-side; to see that it also counts exactly the ways to choose $m+2$ apples, note that this procedure simply picks the two apples with highest labels first, and then picks the other $m$.
add a comment |
There's also a nice combinatorial proof here. Given $n+2$ distinct apples in a line, how many ways can I choose $m+2$ of them? The right-hand side clearly counts this directly, so we focus our attention on the left-hand side.
Number the apples $1, 2, dots, n+2$. Our process of choosing $m+2$ apples is as follows:
- Pick $0 leq i leq n$, and select apple $i+2$.
- Pick $0 leq j leq i$, and select apple $j+1$
- Pick $m$ apples among those ranging from $1$ to $j$.
This gives the summation on the left-hand-side; to see that it also counts exactly the ways to choose $m+2$ apples, note that this procedure simply picks the two apples with highest labels first, and then picks the other $m$.
There's also a nice combinatorial proof here. Given $n+2$ distinct apples in a line, how many ways can I choose $m+2$ of them? The right-hand side clearly counts this directly, so we focus our attention on the left-hand side.
Number the apples $1, 2, dots, n+2$. Our process of choosing $m+2$ apples is as follows:
- Pick $0 leq i leq n$, and select apple $i+2$.
- Pick $0 leq j leq i$, and select apple $j+1$
- Pick $m$ apples among those ranging from $1$ to $j$.
This gives the summation on the left-hand-side; to see that it also counts exactly the ways to choose $m+2$ apples, note that this procedure simply picks the two apples with highest labels first, and then picks the other $m$.
answered Dec 4 '18 at 3:36
platty
3,370320
3,370320
add a comment |
add a comment |
Let $[x^m] f(x)$ denote the coefficient of $x^m$ in the expansion of $f(x)$.
$$
sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}=[x^m]sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{(x+1)^j}
= [x^m]sum_{i=0}^n{frac{(x+1)^{i+1}-1}{x}}= [x^{m+1}]sum_{i=0}^n(x+1)^{i+1}
= [x^{m+1}]frac{(x+1)^{n+2}-(x+1)}{x}=binom{n+2}{m+2}
$$
$blacksquare$
add a comment |
Let $[x^m] f(x)$ denote the coefficient of $x^m$ in the expansion of $f(x)$.
$$
sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}=[x^m]sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{(x+1)^j}
= [x^m]sum_{i=0}^n{frac{(x+1)^{i+1}-1}{x}}= [x^{m+1}]sum_{i=0}^n(x+1)^{i+1}
= [x^{m+1}]frac{(x+1)^{n+2}-(x+1)}{x}=binom{n+2}{m+2}
$$
$blacksquare$
add a comment |
Let $[x^m] f(x)$ denote the coefficient of $x^m$ in the expansion of $f(x)$.
$$
sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}=[x^m]sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{(x+1)^j}
= [x^m]sum_{i=0}^n{frac{(x+1)^{i+1}-1}{x}}= [x^{m+1}]sum_{i=0}^n(x+1)^{i+1}
= [x^{m+1}]frac{(x+1)^{n+2}-(x+1)}{x}=binom{n+2}{m+2}
$$
$blacksquare$
Let $[x^m] f(x)$ denote the coefficient of $x^m$ in the expansion of $f(x)$.
$$
sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{jchoose m}=[x^m]sum_{i=0}^nsum_{j=0}^i{(x+1)^j}
= [x^m]sum_{i=0}^n{frac{(x+1)^{i+1}-1}{x}}= [x^{m+1}]sum_{i=0}^n(x+1)^{i+1}
= [x^{m+1}]frac{(x+1)^{n+2}-(x+1)}{x}=binom{n+2}{m+2}
$$
$blacksquare$
edited Dec 4 '18 at 13:30
answered Dec 4 '18 at 3:21
Anubhab Ghosal
84915
84915
add a comment |
add a comment |
I'm not sure if i got the question right. Is m a number set beforehand? If so, for cases when m > 0, I'm not quite sure whether $0 choose 1$ is defined or in general $n choose m$ for m greater than n is defined. Shouldn't the lower bound of the sum be m?
– Ofya
Dec 3 '18 at 21:41
@Ofya It's typical to define $binom{n}{m}$ to be $0$ when $m > n$.
– Austin Mohr
Dec 3 '18 at 21:44
1
@Austin thanks, so it actually doesn't make a difference whether the lower bound of the sum is 0 or m
– Ofya
Dec 3 '18 at 21:45