The question asks to prove Waring's theorem shown below:
$P(N_k)=\sum_{i=0}^{n-k}(-1)^i$ ${k+1}\choose{k}$ $S_{k+i}$ where $S_j= \sum_{i_1<i_2<...i_j} P(A_1 \cap A_2 ... \cap A_j )$
Where $P(N_k)$ is the probability of selecting exactly k out of a possible N events occurs.
I'm then asked to use the theorem to calculate the probability that out of the purchase of six packets of Corn flakes (each of which contains one of 5 possible busts), you end up with exactly three distinct busts.
The answer is:
$P(N_3) =$${5}\choose{3}$ $\alpha_3$ - ${5}\choose{4}$ ${4}\choose{3}$ $\alpha_4$+${5}\choose{3}$ $\alpha_5$
Where $\alpha_j$ is the probability that the j most recent vice-chancellors are obtained.
I'm confused by the solution in several respects:
1.) Why is $\alpha_j$ is the probability that the j most recent vice-chancellors rather than just any 3 from 5 as I would expect when applying the theorem.
2.) Why is the second term multiplied by 2 binomial coefficients (mathematically I see that to get 3 from 4 you need to know how many sets of 4 you have, but this does not appear to be given in the original formula?)
3.) How should I express the answer in terms on the original theorem nomenclature?
We are starting from having 3 items so $i=3$?
The number of individual events is k=3?
The total possible number of events is $n=5$?
but if this were correct the formula should read:
$P(N_3)=\sum_{i=3}^{2}(-1)^3$ ${k+1}\choose{k}$ $S_{k+i}$ where $S_j= \sum_{i_1<i_2<...i_j} P(A_1 \cap A_2 ... \cap A_j )$
This is clearly wrong?
Also why does the face that there are 6 packets being opening not appear in the formula? Surely as you increase the number of packets the probability of having 3 distinct busts should increase?