Let $x_i,i\in\{1,\cdots,n\}$ be real numbers, and $s_k=x_1^k+\cdots+x_n^k$, I'm asked to calculate $$ |S|:= \begin{vmatrix} s_0 & s_1 & s_2 & \cdots & s_{n-1}\\ s_1 & s_2 & s_3 & \cdots & s_n\\ s_2 & s_3 & s_4 & \cdots & s_{n+1}\\ \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\ s_{n-1} & s_{n} & s_{n+1} & \cdots & s_{2n-2} \end{vmatrix} $$ and to prove that $|S|\ge 0$ for all possible real $x_i$.

I found that $$ |S|=\det[(v_1+\cdots v_n), (x_1v_1+\cdots+x_nv_n),\cdots,(x_1^{n-1}v_1+\cdots+x_n^{n-1}v_n)],\quad\text{where}\, v_j=\begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ x_j \\ \vdots\\ x_j^{n-1} \end{bmatrix} $$ Due to multilinearity of the $\det$ function, I sense it might have something to do with Vandermonde determinant. In fact, it must have the form $$|S|=(\det[v_1,\cdots, v_n])\cdot \text{something}$$ But that "something" involves many cyclic sums and is therefore a horrible mess..

Anyway, is there a neat way to calculate this tricky determinant? Thanks!




  • 2
    $\begingroup$ ....I can't believe my eyes but yeah, it's darn good! $\endgroup$ – Vim Sep 4 '15 at 7:29
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Where does the inspiration come from? I worked out $|S|$ for $n=1$ and $n=2$, and then also for $n=3$ but had a computer factor the result. Seeing the square of the Vandermonde determinant in the $n=3$ case was a strong suggestion to multiply two Vandermonde matrices together. $\endgroup$ – alex.jordan Sep 4 '15 at 7:30
  • $\begingroup$ The proof as written in index notation (with doubled indices summed) is similarly cute. Defining $A_{jk}=x_j^k$, we have $$s_{j+l}=\sum_k x_k^{j+l} = x_k^j x_k^l =A_{jk}A_{lk}=(A A^T)_{jl}$$ $\endgroup$ – Semiclassical Dec 22 '15 at 0:51

Another way to the formula: I think that you have almost finished the job.

I consider your formula with the $v_k$. Replace them by $w_1,..,w_n$ any vectors in $E=\mathbb{R}^n$. Your formula give then an application $f(w_1,..w_n)$ from $E^n$ to $\mathbb{R}$, and you have see that this is $a{\rm det}(w_1,...,w_n)$ for a constant $a$, depending on the $x_k$, but not on the $w_k$. Now to find $a$, you can take for the $w_k$, the vectors of the canonical basis of $E$, and it is easy to finish.


Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

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