Binomial theorem greatest term/coefficent 'formula'? (1 Viewer)

elbatiolpxeho

Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
191
Location
Menai
Gender
Female
HSC
2011


In Cambridge's worked example they expand the binomial into those factorial thingys which takes a while to simplify, after doing plenty of these questions I've noticed that,



Can I just pull this out? Is it a recognised formula or something? I haven't seen a single mention of it in Cambridge :S
 

Drongoski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
4,249
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A


Can I just pull this out? Is it a recognised formula or something? I haven't seen a single mention of it in Cambridge :S
Even when correct, it is not a generally-accepted formula. So it's rather risky. Don't do what Galois did.
 

bleakarcher

Active Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2011
Messages
1,509
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
I think they defined them differently to the way I do.
 

bleakarcher

Active Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2011
Messages
1,509
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
Since, when you think about it, the first term T(1) would contain nC0.
 

D94

New Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2011
Messages
4,426
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Can someone help me out? I have recently started learning binomial theorem and I came across this video:

http://www.slideshare.net/nsimmons/12x1-t08-04-greatest-coefficients-terms

and at about 5 minutes and 30 seconds when he is solving an inequality he multiplies both sides by k not k^2. Watch the video and you will understand what am I saying really. Anyone care to help?
Because k is always positive (it's a term) so it doesn't matter if you multiply by k or k^2. It doesn't change the inequalities sign.
 

RealiseNothing

what is that?It is Cowpea
Joined
Jul 10, 2011
Messages
4,591
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
Can someone help me out? I have recently started learning binomial theorem and I came across this video:

http://www.slideshare.net/nsimmons/12x1-t08-04-greatest-coefficients-terms

and at about 5 minutes and 30 seconds when he is solving an inequality he multiplies both sides by k not k^2. Watch the video and you will understand what am I saying really. Anyone care to help?
k can't be negative, so it's not necessary to square it? That's the only reason I can think of, because when you rearrange it you get:

(63-3k)/2k > 1

(63/2k)-(3/2) > 1

63/2k > 5/2

63/k > 5

So k must be positive.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
4,741
Location
sarajevo
Gender
Female
HSC
2015
Uni Grad
2017
Isn't T(k+1)=nCk*p^k*q^(n-k)?
no, you can define it however you want

i've found that is much more intuitive

it just means i start counting at 0, i.e. T(0) is the first term

but it really doesn't fucking matter okay
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top