This is an example done in class that I don't fully understand.; namely, the conclusion. Some explanation would be nice. The steps written down are steps I worked out. The teacher just showed were we had to end up. The rest I did. I may have made some typos...I hope not though. I didn't know how to show the n choose r so I just denoted it (n r) so its basically reading from left to right instead of up down. Sorry for that, it may be confusing. Nevertheless, I would appreciate some help.
Prove:
(x+y)^n=(n 0)x^n+(n 1)x^(n-1)*y^1+(n 2)x^(n-2)*y^2+...+(n n-1)x*y^(n-1)+(n n)y^n
This was assigned during class time and I worked it to...
(x+y)(x+y)^k=(k 0)x^k+(k 1)x^(k-1)*y^1+(k 2)x^(k-2)*y^2+...+(k k-1)x*y^(k-1)+(k k)y^k
=(x+y)[(k 0)x^k+(k 1)x^(k-1)*y^1+(k 2)x^(k-2)*y^2+...+(k k-1)x*y^(k-1)+(k k)y^k]
[(k 0)x^(k+1)+(k 1)x^(k-1)x^k*y^1+(k 2)x^(K-1)*y^2+...+(k k-1)x+(k k)y^k*x]
[(k 0)x^k*y+(k 1)x^(k-1)x^(k-1)*y^2+(k 2)x^(K-2)*y^3+...+(k k-1)x^(k-1)+(k k)y^(k+1)]
We see that (k 1) and (k 0) are the same, so we can say....(k 0)+(k 1)=(k+1 k)? I don't really understand the end of this proof. I would like to really understand the final statement "(k 0)+(k 1)=(k+1 k)." The teacher said to look at Pascal’s triangle if you don't get it...
This proof stemmed from a discussion about (n k)=(n-1 k) + (n-1 k-1)
Thanks,
Dan
Prove:
(x+y)^n=(n 0)x^n+(n 1)x^(n-1)*y^1+(n 2)x^(n-2)*y^2+...+(n n-1)x*y^(n-1)+(n n)y^n
This was assigned during class time and I worked it to...
(x+y)(x+y)^k=(k 0)x^k+(k 1)x^(k-1)*y^1+(k 2)x^(k-2)*y^2+...+(k k-1)x*y^(k-1)+(k k)y^k
=(x+y)[(k 0)x^k+(k 1)x^(k-1)*y^1+(k 2)x^(k-2)*y^2+...+(k k-1)x*y^(k-1)+(k k)y^k]
[(k 0)x^(k+1)+(k 1)x^(k-1)x^k*y^1+(k 2)x^(K-1)*y^2+...+(k k-1)x+(k k)y^k*x]
[(k 0)x^k*y+(k 1)x^(k-1)x^(k-1)*y^2+(k 2)x^(K-2)*y^3+...+(k k-1)x^(k-1)+(k k)y^(k+1)]
We see that (k 1) and (k 0) are the same, so we can say....(k 0)+(k 1)=(k+1 k)? I don't really understand the end of this proof. I would like to really understand the final statement "(k 0)+(k 1)=(k+1 k)." The teacher said to look at Pascal’s triangle if you don't get it...
This proof stemmed from a discussion about (n k)=(n-1 k) + (n-1 k-1)
Thanks,
Dan