Skip to main content

Verifying the Binomial Formula with Mathematical Induction

The binomial formula states:

(z1+z2)n=∑k=0n(nk)z1n−kz2k(z_1 + z_2)^n = \sum_{k=0}^n \binom{n}{k} z_1^{n-k} z_2^k

where (nk)=n!k!(n−k)!\binom{n}{k} = \frac{n!}{k!(n-k)!} and n=1,2,…n = 1, 2, \ldots. This is a powerful formula in algebra, expressing the expansion of (z1+z2)n(z_1 + z_2)^n as a sum of terms involving powers of z1z_1 and z2z_2.

We’ll verify this formula using mathematical induction. Mathematical induction is a logical method to prove that a statement holds for all positive integers nn. The process involves two steps:

  1. Base Case: Verify the formula for the smallest value of nn, typically n=1n = 1.
  2. Inductive Step: Assume the formula holds for some n=kn = k, and then prove it holds for n=k+1n = k+1.

Step 1: Base Case (n=1n = 1)

For n=1n = 1, the formula becomes:

(z1+z2)1=∑k=01(1k)z11−kz2k(z_1 + z_2)^1 = \sum_{k=0}^1 \binom{1}{k} z_1^{1-k} z_2^k

Let’s calculate both sides:

  • Left-hand side:
(z1+z2)1=z1+z2(z_1 + z_2)^1 = z_1 + z_2
  • Right-hand side:
∑k=01(1k)z11−kz2k=(10)z11z20+(11)z10z21\sum_{k=0}^1 \binom{1}{k} z_1^{1-k} z_2^k = \binom{1}{0} z_1^1 z_2^0 + \binom{1}{1} z_1^0 z_2^1

Here, (10)=1\binom{1}{0} = 1 and (11)=1\binom{1}{1} = 1, so:

∑k=01(1k)z11−kz2k=1⋅z1+1⋅z2=z1+z2\sum_{k=0}^1 \binom{1}{k} z_1^{1-k} z_2^k = 1 \cdot z_1 + 1 \cdot z_2 = z_1 + z_2

Since both sides are equal, the base case holds.


Step 2: Inductive Step

Assume the formula is true for n=kn = k, i.e.,

(z1+z2)k=∑j=0k(kj)z1k−jz2j(z_1 + z_2)^k = \sum_{j=0}^k \binom{k}{j} z_1^{k-j} z_2^j

This is called the inductive hypothesis. We need to prove it holds for n=k+1n = k+1, i.e.,

(z1+z2)k+1=∑j=0k+1(k+1j)z1k+1−jz2j(z_1 + z_2)^{k+1} = \sum_{j=0}^{k+1} \binom{k+1}{j} z_1^{k+1-j} z_2^j

Expanding (z1+z2)k+1(z_1 + z_2)^{k+1}:

Using the distributive property of multiplication:

(z1+z2)k+1=(z1+z2)⋅(z1+z2)k(z_1 + z_2)^{k+1} = (z_1 + z_2) \cdot (z_1 + z_2)^k

Substitute the inductive hypothesis for (z1+z2)k(z_1 + z_2)^k:

(z1+z2)k+1=(z1+z2)⋅∑j=0k(kj)z1k−jz2j(z_1 + z_2)^{k+1} = (z_1 + z_2) \cdot \sum_{j=0}^k \binom{k}{j} z_1^{k-j} z_2^j

Distribute z1+z2z_1 + z_2 across the summation:

(z1+z2)k+1=∑j=0k(kj)z1k−j+1z2j+∑j=0k(kj)z1k−jz2j+1(z_1 + z_2)^{k+1} = \sum_{j=0}^k \binom{k}{j} z_1^{k-j+1} z_2^j + \sum_{j=0}^k \binom{k}{j} z_1^{k-j} z_2^{j+1}

Combining the Two Sums:

Reindex the second summation by letting i=j+1i = j+1 (so j=i−1j = i-1):

∑j=0k(kj)z1k−jz2j+1=∑i=1k+1(ki−1)z1k+1−iz2i\sum_{j=0}^k \binom{k}{j} z_1^{k-j} z_2^{j+1} = \sum_{i=1}^{k+1} \binom{k}{i-1} z_1^{k+1-i} z_2^i

Now the total expression becomes:

(z1+z2)k+1=∑j=0k(kj)z1k−j+1z2j+∑i=1k+1(ki−1)z1k+1−iz2i(z_1 + z_2)^{k+1} = \sum_{j=0}^k \binom{k}{j} z_1^{k-j+1} z_2^j + \sum_{i=1}^{k+1} \binom{k}{i-1} z_1^{k+1-i} z_2^i

Merge these two sums by observing they overlap for j=i−1j = i-1:

(z1+z2)k+1=∑i=0k+1[(ki)+(ki−1)]z1k+1−iz2i(z_1 + z_2)^{k+1} = \sum_{i=0}^{k+1} \left[\binom{k}{i} + \binom{k}{i-1}\right] z_1^{k+1-i} z_2^i

Applying the Binomial Coefficient Identity:

The identity (k+1i)=(ki)+(ki−1)\binom{k+1}{i} = \binom{k}{i} + \binom{k}{i-1} allows us to simplify:

(z1+z2)k+1=∑i=0k+1(k+1i)z1k+1−iz2i(z_1 + z_2)^{k+1} = \sum_{i=0}^{k+1} \binom{k+1}{i} z_1^{k+1-i} z_2^i

This matches the binomial formula for n=k+1n = k+1. Thus, the inductive step is complete.


Conclusion

By proving the base case and the inductive step, we’ve shown that the binomial formula:

(z1+z2)n=∑k=0n(nk)z1n−kz2k(z_1 + z_2)^n = \sum_{k=0}^n \binom{n}{k} z_1^{n-k} z_2^k

is true for all positive integers nn. This concludes the proof!



PS

Reindexing the Sum and Binomial Coefficients: A Detailed Breakdown

Reindexing a summation is often a tricky step in proofs, especially when working with summations involving binomial coefficients. Below, I’ll explain the reindexing step from the proof of the binomial formula in much greater detail, using simple examples and visual aids to show why it works.


Recap of the Key Step

From the inductive step of the proof:

(z1+z2)k+1=∑j=0k(kj)z1k−j+1z2j+∑j=0k(kj)z1k−jz2j+1(z_1 + z_2)^{k+1} = \sum_{j=0}^k \binom{k}{j} z_1^{k-j+1} z_2^j + \sum_{j=0}^k \binom{k}{j} z_1^{k-j} z_2^{j+1}

The goal is to combine these two sums into one sum by reindexing the second summation.

Reindexing the Second Summation

In the second sum:

∑j=0k(kj)z1k−jz2j+1\sum_{j=0}^k \binom{k}{j} z_1^{k-j} z_2^{j+1}

We let i=j+1i = j+1. This substitution shifts the index jj to ii, so that:

  • When j=0j = 0, i=1i = 1,
  • When j=kj = k, i=k+1i = k+1.

Thus, the summation becomes:

∑j=0k(kj)z1k−jz2j+1=∑i=1k+1(ki−1)z1k+1−iz2i\sum_{j=0}^k \binom{k}{j} z_1^{k-j} z_2^{j+1} = \sum_{i=1}^{k+1} \binom{k}{i-1} z_1^{k+1-i} z_2^i

Notice the changes:

  1. The lower limit of the sum changes from j=0j = 0 to i=1i = 1.
  2. The upper limit changes from j=kj = k to i=k+1i = k+1.
  3. The binomial coefficient (kj)\binom{k}{j} is replaced with (ki−1)\binom{k}{i-1}, since j=i−1j = i-1.
  4. The powers of z1z_1 and z2z_2 are updated accordingly: z1k−jz_1^{k-j} becomes z1k+1−iz_1^{k+1-i}, and z2j+1z_2^{j+1} becomes z2iz_2^i.

Combining the Two Sums

Now the two summations can be written as:

  1. ∑j=0k(kj)z1k−j+1z2j\sum_{j=0}^k \binom{k}{j} z_1^{k-j+1} z_2^j,
  2. ∑i=1k+1(ki−1)z1k+1−iz2i\sum_{i=1}^{k+1} \binom{k}{i-1} z_1^{k+1-i} z_2^i.

We align their indices so both sums have the same variable (let’s use ii):

  • The first sum has j=ij = i, so it remains: ∑i=0k(ki)z1k+1−iz2i\sum_{i=0}^k \binom{k}{i} z_1^{k+1-i} z_2^i
  • The second sum starts at i=1i = 1 and ends at i=k+1i = k+1: ∑i=1k+1(ki−1)z1k+1−iz2i\sum_{i=1}^{k+1} \binom{k}{i-1} z_1^{k+1-i} z_2^i

The key observation is that both sums now share the same index ii. Thus, they can be combined into a single summation:

(z1+z2)k+1=∑i=0k+1[(ki)+(ki−1)]z1k+1−iz2i(z_1 + z_2)^{k+1} = \sum_{i=0}^{k+1} \left[\binom{k}{i} + \binom{k}{i-1}\right] z_1^{k+1-i} z_2^i


Why This Works: The Binomial Coefficient Identity

The term (ki)+(ki−1)\binom{k}{i} + \binom{k}{i-1} is a fundamental identity of binomial coefficients. It states:

(k+1i)=(ki)+(ki−1)\binom{k+1}{i} = \binom{k}{i} + \binom{k}{i-1}

This identity comes from Pascal's triangle and reflects how each entry in the triangle is the sum of the two entries directly above it.

Here’s an example:

  • If k=4k = 4 and i=2i = 2, (42)+(41)=4!2!(4−2)!+4!1!(4−1)!=6+4=10=(52)\binom{4}{2} + \binom{4}{1} = \frac{4!}{2!(4-2)!} + \frac{4!}{1!(4-1)!} = 6 + 4 = 10 = \binom{5}{2}

Substituting this identity into the combined sum gives:

(z1+z2)k+1=∑i=0k+1(k+1i)z1k+1−iz2i(z_1 + z_2)^{k+1} = \sum_{i=0}^{k+1} \binom{k+1}{i} z_1^{k+1-i} z_2^i


Visual Understanding

To visualize the process, think of the binomial coefficients as forming Pascal’s triangle:

1111211331\begin{array}{cccccc} & & & 1 & & \\ & & 1 & & 1 & \\ & 1 & & 2 & & 1 \\ 1 & & 3 & & 3 & & 1 \\ \end{array}

When you add two adjacent entries in row kk, you get the entry directly below them in row k+1k+1. For example:

  • In row 3: 1+3=41 + 3 = 4, 3+3=63 + 3 = 6, 3+1=43 + 1 = 4.
  • This mirrors the identity (k+1i)=(ki)+(ki−1)\binom{k+1}{i} = \binom{k}{i} + \binom{k}{i-1}.

Additional Examples

Example 1: k=2k = 2

Expand (z1+z2)3(z_1 + z_2)^3 using the formula:

(z1+z2)3=∑i=03(3i)z13−iz2i(z_1 + z_2)^3 = \sum_{i=0}^3 \binom{3}{i} z_1^{3-i} z_2^i

From Pascal’s triangle:

(30)=1, (31)=3, (32)=3, (33)=1\binom{3}{0} = 1, \ \binom{3}{1} = 3, \ \binom{3}{2} = 3, \ \binom{3}{3} = 1

Result:

(z1+z2)3=z13+3z12z2+3z1z22+z23(z_1 + z_2)^3 = z_1^3 + 3z_1^2z_2 + 3z_1z_2^2 + z_2^3


Final Remarks

Reindexing is a matter of carefully shifting the summation limits and adjusting the binomial coefficients or powers accordingly. The key to combining sums is ensuring both sums use the same index and limits. This process ties directly to the structure of Pascal's triangle, making the algebraic manipulation visually intuitive and mathematically rigorous.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Tribe of Math Mentors: 11 Questions Every Educator Should Answer

It is easy to get caught up in the vague, existential questions of education: How do I become a better teacher? How do I make math engaging? How do I survive the burnout? But as author Tim Ferriss noted when writing his book Tribe of Mentors, "Life punishes the vague wish and rewards the specific ask." When Ferriss set out to deconstruct the habits of world-class performers, he didn’t ask them broad questions about "the secret to success." He engineered 11 highly specific questions designed to bypass rehearsed answers and force his subjects to share actionable, vulnerable, and unconventional insights. Recently, I started thinking about how perfectly this methodology translates to our world. What if we asked these exact types of questions to master math teachers? What if we used them to guide the next generation of educators? Here is my best thinking of what Ferriss’s Tribe of Mentors questionnaire looks like when translated into the context of the mathematics classr...

Beyond Taylor Series: The Magic and History of Padé Approximations

If you have ever taken a calculus class, you probably remember the Taylor series. It is the mathematical magic trick that lets you turn complicated functions—like sines, cosines, and exponentials—into simple, infinitely long polynomials. For centuries, it has been a cornerstone of numerical mathematics. But the Taylor series has a dark secret: it frequently breaks. If a function has a vertical asymptote (a pole) or if you move too far from your starting point, the Taylor series spirals out of control into infinity. It is strictly bounded by what mathematicians call a "radius of convergence." Enter the Padé approximation . Instead of using a single polynomial to estimate a function, a Padé approximant uses a fraction (a ratio of two polynomials). This simple structural change unlocks a profound level of mathematical power, allowing us to see past the limits of Taylor series and model complex, chaotic systems in modern physics and engineering. A Brief History: From Franc...

Unlocking the Matrix: A Guide to Solving Systems of 3 Equations

    If you have ever felt like algebra is just moving letters around a page until a number falls out, solving systems of equations in three variables might seem like the ultimate boss battle. Instead of just dealing with x and y on a flat piece of paper, a third variable (like z, or in our case r, s, and t) brings the math into three-dimensional space. Every equation represents a flat plane, and solving the system means finding the exact 3D coordinate where all three planes intersect. But before we dive into a full 3x3 system, let's talk about what happens when the number of equations doesn't perfectly match the number of variables. The Goldilocks Problem: Too Many or Not Enough Equations? For a system to have a single, beautifully neat solution, you generally need exactly as many equations as you have variables. But what if the balance is off? Not Enough Equations (Underdetermined Systems): Let's say you have 3 variables but only 2 equations. This is like having two plane...