Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Say i got $\displaystyle{\frac{(1-2x)}{(1+3x)^3}}$

I used $\displaystyle{\frac{1}{(1+3x)}}$ $=\sum_{n=0}^\infty(-3)^n x^n$ and differentiated twice

I got $\displaystyle{\frac{(1-2x)}{(1+3x)^3}}$ = $=\sum_{n=0}^\infty [((n)(n-1)(-3)^n)/18] x^{(n-2)}$

Multiply (1-2x) on both side I got

= $\sum_{n=0}^\infty [((n)(n-1)(-3)^n)/18] x^{(n-2)}$ - $2\sum_{n=0}^\infty [((n-1)(n-2)(-3)^{(n-1)}))/18] x^{(n-2)}$

$=\sum_{n=0}^\infty [(5n-4)(n-1)(-3)^n /54 ] x^{(n-2)}$

Is that correct ? I had a feeling that its wrong...

Coefficient of $z^{(n-2)}$ is $\displaystyle{\frac{(5n-4)(n-1)(-3)^n}{54}}$?

share|improve this question
    
Please write (1-2x)/(1+3x)^3 instead of 1-2x/(1+3x)^3, because a-b/c is likely to be interpreted as a-(b/c) rather than (a-b)/c. Even better, you can use LaTeX here to write $\displaystyle{\frac{1-2x}{(1+3x)^3}}$. The syntax I used for that is $\displaystyle{\frac{1-2x}{(1+3x)^3}}$; you put the LaTeX math between dollar signs. Please include the sums when you mean a series. For example, you really want $\frac{1}{1+3x}=\sum_{n=0}^\infty(-3)^nx^n$ rather than what you wrote in the second line. (If you're new to LaTeX, you can right-click then click "Show Source" to see how it is done.) –  Jonas Meyer May 4 '11 at 14:19
    
Thank you and I will edit it. –  Jono May 4 '11 at 14:36
    
@Jono: Thanks. Some of the things in your edit are presumably not what was intended. For example, you now have $1-2x$ in two numerators where I believe you want $1$. The syntax $\frac{a}{b}$ gives $\frac{a}{b}$, so you can adjust the numerator and denominator in brackets to get the fraction you want. –  Jonas Meyer May 4 '11 at 14:38
    
Format adjusted, thank you. –  Jono May 4 '11 at 14:48
    
When you want exponents of more than one character, you need to put them in braces: x^{(n+1)} gives $x^{(n+1)}$ while x^(n+1) gives $x^(n+1)$ –  Ross Millikan May 4 '11 at 15:10
show 1 more comment

2 Answers

You have a small mistake in the second line: $\frac{1-2x}{1+3x}=(1-2x)\overset{\infty}{\underset{n=0}{\sum}}(-3)^nx^n$.
But you can use the following: for all $a \in \mathbb{C}$ we have $(1+x)^a=\overset{\infty}{\underset{n=0}{\sum}}\binom{a}{n}x^n$, where $\binom{a}{n}$ is the formal notation for $\frac{a(a-1)\cdot...\cdot(a-n+1)}{n!}$ and $\binom{a}{0}=1$. Applying this, you can check your answer.

share|improve this answer
    
sorry it was suppose to be a 1, error during edit –  Jono May 4 '11 at 15:35
add comment

Adding on Dennis Gulko's answer.

For any $m \in \mathbb{N}$ fixed, it holds $$ \frac{1}{{(1 + mx)^m }} = \sum\limits_{n = 0}^\infty {\frac{{m \cdots (m + n - 1)}}{{n!}}( - m)^n x^n }, $$ provided that $|x|$ is sufficiently small.

This fact (confirmed numerically) can be shown in a probabilistic setting as follows. Let $X$ be a gamma$(m,1)$ random variable, so that $X$ has density function $f(x)=e^{ - x} x^{m - 1} /\Gamma (m)$, $x > 0$. The moment-generating function (MGF) of $X$ is given by $$ {\rm E}[e^{tX} ] = \frac{1}{{(1 - t)^m }} $$ (indeed, note that $1/(1-t)$ is the MGF of the exponential$(1)$ distribution, and $X$ can be written as a sum of $m$ independent exponential$(1)$ variables). Further, the $n$th moment ($n=0,1,2,\ldots$) of $X$ is given by $$ \mu_n' = \int_0^\infty {x^n f(x)\,{\rm d}x} = \frac{1}{{\Gamma (m)}}\int_0^\infty {x^{n + m - 1} e^{ - x} \,{\rm d}x} = \frac{{\Gamma (n + m)}}{{\Gamma (m)}} = m \cdots (m + n - 1) $$ (note that $\mu_0' = 1$). Hence, for all $t$ in a neighborhood of $0$, it holds $$ {\rm E}[e^{tX} ] = \sum\limits_{n = 0}^\infty {\frac{{\mu _n' }}{{n!}}t^n } = \sum\limits_{n = 0}^\infty {\frac{{m \cdots (m + n - 1)}}{{n!}}t^n } . $$ Finally, putting $t = -mx$, we get $$ \frac{1}{{(1 + mx)^m }} = \sum\limits_{n = 0}^\infty {\frac{{m \cdots (m + n - 1)}}{{n!}}( - m)^n x^n } . $$

share|improve this answer
    
=\ sorry but that made me even more confuse –  Jono May 4 '11 at 17:20
    
and I don't mean to be rude, I really just want to know if I multiply (1-2x) on both side correctly or not because the answer seems to be so messy –  Jono May 4 '11 at 17:28
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.