Can anyone help me find a literature mentioning the following formula. I formulated it a long time ago and I am not sure if someone had thought of it before me.

\(_kC_r=\sum_{n=1}^{k-r+1} (_{k-n}C_{r-1})\) for \(k\geq r\geq 2\)

No vote yet

1 vote

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...

Easy Math Editor

`*italics*`

or`_italics_`

italics`**bold**`

or`__bold__`

boldNote: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctlyparagraph 1

paragraph 2

`[example link](https://brilliant.org)`

`> This is a quote`

Remember to wrap math in \( ... \) or \[ ... \] to ensure proper formatting.`2 \times 3`

`2^{34}`

`a_{i-1}`

`\frac{2}{3}`

`\sqrt{2}`

`\sum_{i=1}^3`

`\sin \theta`

`\boxed{123}`

## Comments

Sort by:

TopNewest@Kishlaya Jaiswal

Have you read this formula ever before ? I'm pretty sure only you can help Mr. Frago out :)

Log in to reply

Yep, it's indeed the Hockey-Stick Formula

I've mentioned clearly about it in my article, so you may wish to read it.

Yeah, now I've got a nice topic for a new wiki.

Log in to reply

I see , so that's why I was able to link it with you :)

I had just used it once as an identity , more like just a formula . I am wondering what else can be there to it !!

I'll be eagerly waiting for your wiki :)

P.S. Congrats on your getting 200 Friends !!

Log in to reply

@Kishlaya Jaiswal,@Ronak Agarwal ,@Pranjal Jain ,@Deepanshu Gupta ,@megh choksi ,@Sudeep Salgia ,@Sandeep Bhardwaj sir ,@Raghav Vaidyanathan ,@Akshay Bodhare and everyone on Brilliant .

Did you guys see the Chemistry questions that I have posted recently ? If so , can you give me a feedback on it's level and pretty much anything else you would like to tell me ?

I just wanted Chemistry to be as popular on Brilliant as are Maths and Physics .

Please give a honest feedback , I won't mind if you criticize me .

Last but not the least , the king of Brilliant @Calvin Lin sir , even your comment will be invaluable :)

Log in to reply

Log in to reply

I understand why you have said that , thanks for replying :)

Log in to reply

It's different from the Hockey-Stick formula.

Log in to reply

\[\begin{eqnarray} \sum_{n=1}^{k-r+1} {k-n \choose r-1} & = & {k-1 \choose r-1} + {k-2 \choose r-1} + \ldots + {r-1 \choose r-1} \end{eqnarray}\]

Setting \(r-1=t\), and then writing the reverse expression, gives \[\begin{eqnarray} \sum_{n=1}^{k-t} {k-n \choose t} & = & \sum_{n=0}^{k-t-1} {t+n-1 \choose t} \\ & = & {t \choose t} + {t+1 \choose t} + \ldots + {k-2 \choose t} + {k-1 \choose t} \\ & = & {k \choose t+1} \\ & = & {k \choose r} \end{eqnarray}\]

which follows directly from Hockey Stick Identity

Thanks.

Log in to reply

\[\left(\frac{1}{1-x}\right)^{r+1} = \left(\frac{1}{1-x}\right)^{r}\left(\frac{1}{1-x}\right)\]

and then comparing the coefficients of \(x^{k-r}\)

Log in to reply

Thanks :)

Log in to reply

Log in to reply

EDIT: I appreciate you looking into this.

Log in to reply

But this one clearly shows that it is the Hockey-Stick:http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Wiki/index.php/Combinatorial

identity#Hockey-StickIdentity.Thank you very much.

EDIT: By the way, I thought of it looking into a pentagram.

Log in to reply