20
$\begingroup$

I have

$$\sum_k^n P_k x_k$$

Am I allowed to split it up into two sums so I have it like

$$\sum_k^n P_k \sum_k^nx_k$$

$\endgroup$
5
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ No. But since $P_{n}$ doesn't depend on the sum (of $k$), you can take it out, and it becomes $P_{n}\sum_{k=1}^{n}x_{k}$. $\endgroup$ Oct 5, 2014 at 3:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In $\sum_k^nP_nx_k$, $P_n$ doesn't depend on $k$ so can be factored out. $\endgroup$ Oct 5, 2014 at 3:41
  • $\begingroup$ Assuming that $P_n$ is a constant with respect to $k$, the above comments are true. $\endgroup$
    – Squirtle
    Oct 5, 2014 at 3:48
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ $2 = 1\cdot 1 + 1\cdot 1 \neq (1+1)\cdot(1+1) = 4$. $\endgroup$
    – Slade
    Oct 5, 2014 at 6:18
  • $\begingroup$ Where is your research? Did you try tackling the problem? Downvote. $\endgroup$
    – alejnavab
    Feb 4, 2022 at 18:14

4 Answers 4

44
$\begingroup$

$\qquad\qquad$

$$x_1\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad x_2\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad x_3\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad x_4$$

Imagine that the vertical segments are your $P$'s. Then the product of sums is the area of the entire rectangle, whereas the sum of products is only the red area.

$\endgroup$
0
14
$\begingroup$

Assuming P depends on k and not n then the summation $$ \sum_k P_k x_k $$ Creates terms like $$ P_1 x_1 + P_2 x_2 + \ldots + P_n x_n $$ But, if you took $P_k$ out then you would have two independent sums: $$ \sum_k P_k \sum_k x_k $$ Producing two separate sums multiplying each other like $$ (P_1 + P_2 + \ldots + P_n) (x_1 + x_2 + \ldots + x_n) $$ And this obviously produces terms like $P_1 x_1, P_1 x_2,\ldots$ or as produced by the double sum written like: $$ \sum_i \sum_j P_i x_j $$ So the original summation is definitely not the same as this double sum.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

http://tutorial.math.lamar.edu/Classes/CalcI/SummationNotation.aspx

^^^That offers a nice summary of summation notation and its properties.

To answer your question specifically, you should not split this into two different summations. Rather, notice that P does not depend on k. You can treat P as a constant and simply move it outside the summation so that it multiples the result of your summation of $x_k$, which does depend on your variable k.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ actually I made a typo P depends on k and n. I ask because I know that the the sum with the $P_nk is always equal to 1 for all n and k. But thanks for the response, it does make sense with what I wrote! $\endgroup$
    – Jeff
    Oct 5, 2014 at 4:09
  • $\begingroup$ That link answers my question though, I appreciate it thanks $\endgroup$
    – Jeff
    Oct 5, 2014 at 4:10
0
$\begingroup$

If you just want to analyze the quantum, you can just use the Cauchy's inequality in n-dimensional Euclidean space, i.e.

$$ \left(\sum_{i=1}^n u_i v_i\right)^2 \leq\left(\sum_{i=1}^n u_i^2\right)\left(\sum_{i=1}^n v_i^2\right) $$

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .