Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

$$\frac{\binom{n}{j}_q\binom{n+1}{j}_q \cdots\binom{n+k-1}{j}_q}{\binom{j}{j}_q\binom{j+1}{j}_q\cdots\binom{j+k-1}{j}_q}$$ where $n,j,k$ are non-negative integers.

share|cite|improve this question
What do the $q$ subscripts on the binomial coefficients mean? – Henning Makholm Dec 28 '11 at 22:39
It means it is q binomial coefficient and here is the link to its definition – sophie668 Dec 28 '11 at 22:44

EDIT: I previously gave a flawed counterexample to the question, but I discovered a flaw in it and now believe the statement in the question to be true. The last two paragraphs are not a formal proof of this, but I believe could be turned into such a proof.

If $n<j$ then this is $0$, which is certainly a polynomial in $q$. Otherwise, we have $$\frac{\binom{n}{j}_q\binom{n+1}{j}_q \cdots\binom{n+k-1}{j}_q}{\binom{j}{j}_q\binom{j+1}{j}_q\cdots\binom{j+k-1}{j}_q} $$ $$= \frac{([n]_q[n-1]_q\cdots[n-j+1]_q)\cdots([n+k-1]_q[n+k-2]_q\cdots[n+k-j]_q)}{([j]_q[j-1]_q\cdots[1]_q)\cdots([j+k-1]_q[j+k-2]_q\cdots[k]_q)}$$ where $[m_q] = 1 + q + \cdots + q^{m-1}=(q-\zeta_m)(q-\zeta_m^2)\cdots(q-\zeta_m^{m-1})$ and $\zeta_m$ is a primitive $m^{th}$ root of unity. These polynomials are irreducible over $\mathbb{C}$ and since $\mathbb{C}[x]$ is a unique factorization domain we can only write $$\frac{([n]_q[n-1]_q\cdots[n-j+1]_q)\cdots([n+k-1]_q[n+k-2]_q\cdots[n+k-j]_q)}{([j]_q[j-1]_q\cdots[1]_q)\cdots([j+k-1]_q[j+k-2]_q\cdots[k]_q)}$$ as a polynomial in $q$ over $\mathbb{C}$ if the factors $(q-\zeta_m^l)$ in the denominator cancel with factors in the numerator. Note that $\zeta_{im}^i = \zeta_i$ (this ignores our choice of primitive root, but we can make our choice arbitrarily).

The factor $(q-\zeta_j)$ of $[j]_q$ cancels with the factor $(q-\zeta_{im}^i)$ of $[ij]_q$ chosen as the unique multiple of $j$ among $n,n-1,\ldots,n-j+1$. Similarly, the factor $(q-\zeta_j^2)$ cancels with $(q-\zeta_{im}^{2i})$, and repeating this procedure we cancel all the factors of $[j]_q$ with factors of $[ij]_q$. We can pick a multiple $i'(j-1)$ of $j-1$ among $\{n,n-1,\ldots,n-j+1\}-\{ij\}$, and similarly a multiple of $j-2$ among $\{n,n-1,\ldots,n-j+1\}-\{ij,i'(j-1)\}$, and by repeating this procedure cancel all factors of $[j]_q[j-1]_q\cdots[1]_q$ with factors of $[n]_q[n-1]_q\cdots[n-j+1]_q$.

These are easy factors to cancel, because some multiple of $j$ is among $n+1,n,\ldots,n-j+1$. But what about the factors of $[j+1]_q$? Well, we have $i'(j+1)=i'j+i'$ among $n,n-1,\ldots,n-j+2$ for some $i'$, as the gap between $i'(j+1)$ and $(i'+1)(j+1)$ is $j+1$, and so we can cancel its factors with those of $[n-j+1]_q$ or of one of $[n+1]_q,\ldots,[n-j+2]_q$. But wait, we've already used $[n-j+1]_q$ to cancel factors in the denominator! True, but if $n-j+1$ is a multiple of $j+1$ then we must have used it to cancel factors of $[\frac{j+1}{2}]_q$ or smaller, so we can still cancel at least half the factors of $[j+1]_q$, and the other half will involve roots of unity of smaller order and so can be canceled with other leftovers among $[n]_q,\ldots,[n-j+1]_q$. The same should extend to $[j]_q,[j-1]_q,\ldots,[2]_q$. Iterating this argument should allow cancellation of all the factors in the denominator.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.