Let S denote the set of triples (i,j,k) such that i + j + k = n.
Evaluate \displaystyle \sum_{(i,j,k) \in S} ijk.
[originally posted by und on TSR]
Let S denote the set of triples (i,j,k) such that i + j + k = n.
Evaluate \displaystyle \sum_{(i,j,k) \in S} ijk.
[originally posted by und on TSR]
i,j,k\in\mathbb{N}_0? (i guess i,j,k\in\mathbb{N} would also suffice in the context)
It isn’t specified, I’d roll with whatever makes more sense.
i’ll assume that i,j,k\in\mathbb{N}_0 and (i,j,k) is an ordered triple (eg. (1,2,0)\not\equiv(0,2,1))
WLOG consider i as it varies. firstly as a sub-problem (for ease of understanding) fix i=0\implies j+k=n. now this sub-problem reduces to finding all unordered pairs (j,k) such that j+k=n, to then find jk for each.
notice that if j+k=N for some N\in\mathbb{N}, then \exists \ N+1 such pairs, which are (0,N),(1,N-1),(2,N-2),\ldots,(N-1,1),(N,0). so the sum of all our jk is given by, generally as N varies
for i=0 we have N=n, and the desired sum will be
now the sub-problem can easily be generalised to the main problem, as all that is different is that as i varies, we must vary N with it. specifically, if i=b then N=n-b. so we will obtain a double sum.
i also just noticed that the result is a product of 5 consecutive numbers, and because 120 is a factorial you can rewrite this v neatly as \displaystyle\frac{(n+2)!}{(n-3)!5!}=\binom{n+2}{5}
Do you mean:
\displaystyle \frac {(n + 2)!} {(n - 3)! 5!} = \binom {n + 2} 5
(having (n - 2)! on the denominator would cancel the n - 2 term too and 120 = 5!)
Otherwise, nice solution!
yep oops you’re right sry, think it was like 3am when i “noticed” that so i’m not surprised it was off i remember thinking 4!=120 for some reason, thanks i’ll edit it
any ideas on where the binomial term comes out from? seems a rly unexpected result out of taking the sum of the products
Well when I first saw the question I thought some kind of binomial expansion (would make sense with the binomial coefficient) since that’s where you often see terms like \displaystyle \sum_{i + j + k = n} (\ldots) but I drew a blank from there.
There might be some very nice combinatorial way of just writing down the answer with a line of working (seeing the answer’s so simple) and if that’s the case I’d love to see it lol.
ooh interesting, true that could be linked to it. i’ll give it some thought as well ((: