3

Mathematica told me the following identity,

$$x\notin \mathbb{Z}, \quad m\in \mathbb{Z}^+,\quad \sum_{j=0}^m \frac{\Gamma(x-j)\Gamma(m-x+j)}{\Gamma(j+1)\Gamma(m-j+1)} = 0 .$$

I tried to prove it but not successful. Could anyone please take a look at the above identity?

I rearranged it to the form, $$ \frac{\pi}{\sin\pi x} \sum_{j=0}^m (-1)^{j} \frac{\prod_{i=1}^{m-1}(i+j-x)}{j!(m-j)!}$$ but doesn't seem to help.

mastrok
  • 1,455
  • 8
  • 21

1 Answers1

4

Suppose we seek to prove that for $x$ not an integer and $m$ a positive integer

$$\sum_{q=0}^m \frac{\Gamma(x-q)\Gamma(m-x+q)}{\Gamma(q+1)\Gamma(m-q+1)} = 0.$$

We have

$$\Gamma(x-q) \prod_{p=1}^{q} (x-p) = \Gamma(x)$$

and

$$\Gamma(m-x+q) = \Gamma(1-x) \prod_{p=1}^{m+q-1} (p-x).$$

This yields for the sum

$$\frac{1}{m!} \frac{\pi}{\sin(\pi x)} \sum_{q=0}^m {m\choose q} \frac{\prod_{p=1}^{m+q-1} (p-x)}{\prod_{p=1}^{q} (x-p)} \\ = \frac{1}{m!} \frac{\pi}{\sin(\pi x)} \sum_{q=0}^m {m\choose q} (-1)^q \frac{\prod_{p=1}^{m+q-1} (p-x)}{\prod_{p=1}^{q} (p-x)} \\ = \frac{1}{m!} \frac{\pi}{\sin(\pi x)} \sum_{q=0}^m {m\choose q} (-1)^q \prod_{p=q+1}^{m+q-1} (p-x) \\ = \frac{1}{m} \frac{\pi}{\sin(\pi x)} \sum_{q=0}^m {m\choose q} (-1)^q {m+q-1-x\choose m-1}.$$

Introduce

$${m+q-1-x\choose m-1} = \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{|z|=\epsilon} \frac{1}{z^{m}} (1+z)^{m+q-1-x} \; dz.$$

We get for the sum

$$\frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{|z|=\epsilon} \frac{1}{z^{m}} (1+z)^{m-1-x} \sum_{q=0}^m {m\choose q} (-1)^q (1+z)^q \; dz \\ = \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{|z|=\epsilon} \frac{1}{z^{m}} (1+z)^{m-1-x} (-z)^m \; dz \\ = \frac{(-1)^m}{2\pi i} \int_{|z|=\epsilon} (1+z)^{m-1-x} \; dz = 0.$$

This is the claim.

Remark. To ensure the integrand being analytic in a neighborhood of zero (recall that $x$ is not an integer) we may take e.g. $(1+z)^\alpha = \exp(\alpha\log(1+z))$ with the principal branch of the logarithm that has argument from $-\pi$ to $\pi$ (branch cut on the negative real axis). We can multiply two powers $\alpha$ and $\beta$ of $1+z$ as long as we use the same branch of the logarithm throughout.

Even better we can use the formal power series definition to prove that $$(1+z)^\alpha (1+z)^\beta = (1+z)^{\alpha+\beta}$$ where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are not integers. We get

$$[z^n] (1+z)^\alpha (1+z)^\beta = \sum_{p=0}^n {\alpha \choose p} {\beta \choose n-p} \\ = \frac{1}{n!} \sum_{p=0}^n {n\choose p} \alpha^{\underline{p}} \beta^{\underline{n-p}}.$$

The coefficient here on $\alpha^{p_1} \beta^{p_2}$ is

$$\frac{1}{n!} \sum_{p=0}^n {n\choose p} (-1)^{p_1+p} \left[p\atop p_1\right] (-1)^{p_2+n-p} \left[n-p\atop p_2\right] \\ = \frac{(-1)^{n+p_1+p_2}}{n!} \sum_{p=0}^n {n\choose p} \left[p\atop p_1\right] \left[n-p\atop p_2\right].$$

On the other hand we have

$$[\alpha^{p_1} \beta^{p_2}] {\alpha+\beta\choose n} = [\alpha^{p_1} \beta^{p_2}] \frac{1}{n!} \sum_{p=0}^n (\alpha+\beta)^p (-1)^{n+p} \left[n\atop p\right] \\ = \frac{1}{n!} {p_1+p_2\choose p_1} (-1)^{n+p_1+p_2} \left[n\atop p_1+p_2\right].$$

The quantity other than the sign and the factorial counts the number of ways we can partition $[n]$ into $p_1$ red and $p_2$ blue cycles, using everything. The sum says we first pick the values that will form the red cycles and partition them into $p_1$ cycles. Then we partition the remaining values, which will be blue, into $p_2$ cycles. The closed formula says that we first partition $[n]$ into $p_1+p_2$ cycles and then choose the $p_1$ red cycles, leaving the rest blue. This concludes the argument where we have not used complex variables and/or branches of the logarithm.

Marko Riedel
  • 61,317
  • (+1) How much do you like analytic combinatorics? ;D – Jack D'Aurizio Sep 22 '16 at 02:37
  • I don't quite understand, I am a real fan of analytical combinatorics, see this MSE link. There are times nonetheless when a combinatorial argument can be simpler and more robust than complex variables. – Marko Riedel Sep 22 '16 at 02:39
  • Nothing to understand, it was just a way for stating that you're really good at it. – Jack D'Aurizio Sep 22 '16 at 02:41
  • 1
    Thank you for these kind words. I have seen many of your remarkable posts and I enjoy the eureka effect that some of them have, even to the point of refraining myself from posting work that mostly consists of algebraic manipulations even though it might be correct. A lot of algebra is a kind of flag indicating one should look for a more elegant solution. The Egorychev method in particular can produce complicated expressions quickly, which is a signal to investigate a different path. – Marko Riedel Sep 22 '16 at 02:46
  • Thanks a lot! The use of complex integral is really smart. I did not understand your last paragraph, could you please explain a bit more? the number of ways we can partition $[n]$ into $p_1$ red and $p_2$ blue cycles, using everything ?? What does it mean by red cycles and blue cycles ? – mastrok Sep 22 '16 at 04:26
  • Stirling numbers of the first kind count labeled partitions into cycles. – Marko Riedel Sep 22 '16 at 17:11