The vanishing of sum of coefficients: symmetric polynomials












7












$begingroup$


Denote $pmb{X}_n=(x_1,x_2,dots,x_n)$. Consider the symmetric polynomial
$$f_n(pmb X_n)=prod_{1leq i<jleq n}(x_i+x_j).$$
Expand these in terms of elementary symmetric polynomials, say
$$f_n(pmb{X}_n)=sum_{mu}c_{mu,n}cdot e_{mu}(pmb{X}_n).$$



For example,
begin{align*} f_3&=-e_{(3)}+e_{(2,1)} \
f_5&=-e_{(5,5)}+2e_{(5,4,1)}+e_{(5,3,2)}-e_{(5,2,2,1)}-e_{(4,4,1,1)}-e_{(4,3,3)}+e_{(4,3,2,1)}.
end{align*}




QUESTION 1. Is it true that, for integers $n geq 1$, we have
$$sum_{mu}c_{mu,2n+1}=0?$$




POSTSCRIPT. Fedor's reply (to Question 1) shown below suggests to me to ask:




QUESTION 2. Is it true that, for integers $n geq 1$, we have
$$sum_{mu}c_{mu,2n}=(-1)^{binom{n}2}?$$







reference-request co.combinatorics rt.representation-theory symmetric-functions







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    7












    $begingroup$


    Denote $pmb{X}_n=(x_1,x_2,dots,x_n)$. Consider the symmetric polynomial
    $$f_n(pmb X_n)=prod_{1leq i<jleq n}(x_i+x_j).$$
    Expand these in terms of elementary symmetric polynomials, say
    $$f_n(pmb{X}_n)=sum_{mu}c_{mu,n}cdot e_{mu}(pmb{X}_n).$$



    For example,
    begin{align*} f_3&=-e_{(3)}+e_{(2,1)} \
    f_5&=-e_{(5,5)}+2e_{(5,4,1)}+e_{(5,3,2)}-e_{(5,2,2,1)}-e_{(4,4,1,1)}-e_{(4,3,3)}+e_{(4,3,2,1)}.
    end{align*}




    QUESTION 1. Is it true that, for integers $n geq 1$, we have
    $$sum_{mu}c_{mu,2n+1}=0?$$




    POSTSCRIPT. Fedor's reply (to Question 1) shown below suggests to me to ask:




    QUESTION 2. Is it true that, for integers $n geq 1$, we have
    $$sum_{mu}c_{mu,2n}=(-1)^{binom{n}2}?$$







    reference-request co.combinatorics rt.representation-theory symmetric-functions







    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      7












      7








      7


      1



      $begingroup$


      Denote $pmb{X}_n=(x_1,x_2,dots,x_n)$. Consider the symmetric polynomial
      $$f_n(pmb X_n)=prod_{1leq i<jleq n}(x_i+x_j).$$
      Expand these in terms of elementary symmetric polynomials, say
      $$f_n(pmb{X}_n)=sum_{mu}c_{mu,n}cdot e_{mu}(pmb{X}_n).$$



      For example,
      begin{align*} f_3&=-e_{(3)}+e_{(2,1)} \
      f_5&=-e_{(5,5)}+2e_{(5,4,1)}+e_{(5,3,2)}-e_{(5,2,2,1)}-e_{(4,4,1,1)}-e_{(4,3,3)}+e_{(4,3,2,1)}.
      end{align*}




      QUESTION 1. Is it true that, for integers $n geq 1$, we have
      $$sum_{mu}c_{mu,2n+1}=0?$$




      POSTSCRIPT. Fedor's reply (to Question 1) shown below suggests to me to ask:




      QUESTION 2. Is it true that, for integers $n geq 1$, we have
      $$sum_{mu}c_{mu,2n}=(-1)^{binom{n}2}?$$







      reference-request co.combinatorics rt.representation-theory symmetric-functions







      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      Denote $pmb{X}_n=(x_1,x_2,dots,x_n)$. Consider the symmetric polynomial
      $$f_n(pmb X_n)=prod_{1leq i<jleq n}(x_i+x_j).$$
      Expand these in terms of elementary symmetric polynomials, say
      $$f_n(pmb{X}_n)=sum_{mu}c_{mu,n}cdot e_{mu}(pmb{X}_n).$$



      For example,
      begin{align*} f_3&=-e_{(3)}+e_{(2,1)} \
      f_5&=-e_{(5,5)}+2e_{(5,4,1)}+e_{(5,3,2)}-e_{(5,2,2,1)}-e_{(4,4,1,1)}-e_{(4,3,3)}+e_{(4,3,2,1)}.
      end{align*}




      QUESTION 1. Is it true that, for integers $n geq 1$, we have
      $$sum_{mu}c_{mu,2n+1}=0?$$




      POSTSCRIPT. Fedor's reply (to Question 1) shown below suggests to me to ask:




      QUESTION 2. Is it true that, for integers $n geq 1$, we have
      $$sum_{mu}c_{mu,2n}=(-1)^{binom{n}2}?$$







      reference-request co.combinatorics rt.representation-theory symmetric-functions




      reference-request co.combinatorics rt.representation-theory symmetric-functions






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited 7 hours ago







      T. Amdeberhan

















      asked 10 hours ago









      T. AmdeberhanT. Amdeberhan

      17.7k229131




      17.7k229131






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          9












          $begingroup$

          Choose $n$ numbers $x_1,dots,x_n$ for which all elementary symmetric polynomials are equal to 1 and substitute them to our $f_n$. We should get zero value for odd $n$. Well, what are these numbers? The roots of $x^{n}-x^{n-1}+x^{n-2}-ldots-1=(x^{n+1}-1)/(x+1)$. This polynomial indeed has two roots with sum equal to 0 when $n$ is odd.



          If $n=2k$ is even, we substitute the roots $w_1,dots,w_n$ of the polynomial $f(x)=x^{2k}-x^{2k-1}+ldots+1=(x^{2k+1}+1)/(x+1)=(x-w_1)dots (x-w_n)$. Then your claim reads as $$A:=prod_{1leqslant i<jleqslant n} (w_i+w_j)=(-1)^{binom{k}2}.$$ This is done by the standard trick (and is well known itself). At first,
          $$
          |A|^2=prod_{i=1}^n prod_{jne i,1leqslant jleqslant n}|w_i+w_j|=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^n prod_{j=1}^n|(-w_i)-w_j|=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^n |f(w_i)|=\=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^nleft|frac{(-w_i)^{2k+1}+1}{-w_i+1}right|=1,
          $$
          since $1+(-w_i)^{2k+1}=2$ for all $i=1,2,dots,n$ and $prod_{i=1}^n (1-w_i)=f(1)=1$.



          At second, we need to find the argument of the complex number $A$. This may be done for example as follows: all pairs $w_i+w_j$ for which $w_i$ and $w_j$ are not complex conjugate are partitioned onto complex conjugate pairs. In each pair the product is positive reals. If $w_i$ and $w_j$ are complex conjugate, the sum $w_i+w_j$ is a real number whose sign is the sign of the real part of $w_i$. Therefore $A$ is the real number whose sign equals $(1)^{m/2}$, where $m$ is the number of $w$'s in the left half-plane. It is easy to see that $m/2=[k/2]$ and that $(-1)^{[k/2]}=(-1)^{k(k-1)/2}$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$









          • 4




            $begingroup$
            An alternative to your "standard trick" is to observe that $w_i + w_j = dfrac{w_i^2 - w_j^2}{w_i - w_j}$. This yields $prodlimits_{i<j} left(w_i+w_jright) = dfrac{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i^2 - w_j^2right)}{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i-w_jright)}$. But the $n$ numbers $-w_1^2, -w_2^2, ldots, -w_n^2$ are just a permutation of the $n$ numbers $w_1, w_2, ldots, w_n$, and thus $dfrac{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i^2 - w_j^2right)}{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i-w_jright)}$ equals a power of $-1$ times the sign of this permutation. Both are easy to compute.
            $endgroup$
            – darij grinberg
            7 hours ago








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Yes, this is another standard trick:) Actually possibly the shortest proof is to combine them: the absolute values equals 1 since the differences $w_i^2-w_j^2$ and $w_i-w_j$ are the same up to sign, and the sign may be obtained by looking at the argument.
            $endgroup$
            – Fedor Petrov
            7 hours ago











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "504"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f324489%2fthe-vanishing-of-sum-of-coefficients-symmetric-polynomials%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          9












          $begingroup$

          Choose $n$ numbers $x_1,dots,x_n$ for which all elementary symmetric polynomials are equal to 1 and substitute them to our $f_n$. We should get zero value for odd $n$. Well, what are these numbers? The roots of $x^{n}-x^{n-1}+x^{n-2}-ldots-1=(x^{n+1}-1)/(x+1)$. This polynomial indeed has two roots with sum equal to 0 when $n$ is odd.



          If $n=2k$ is even, we substitute the roots $w_1,dots,w_n$ of the polynomial $f(x)=x^{2k}-x^{2k-1}+ldots+1=(x^{2k+1}+1)/(x+1)=(x-w_1)dots (x-w_n)$. Then your claim reads as $$A:=prod_{1leqslant i<jleqslant n} (w_i+w_j)=(-1)^{binom{k}2}.$$ This is done by the standard trick (and is well known itself). At first,
          $$
          |A|^2=prod_{i=1}^n prod_{jne i,1leqslant jleqslant n}|w_i+w_j|=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^n prod_{j=1}^n|(-w_i)-w_j|=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^n |f(w_i)|=\=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^nleft|frac{(-w_i)^{2k+1}+1}{-w_i+1}right|=1,
          $$
          since $1+(-w_i)^{2k+1}=2$ for all $i=1,2,dots,n$ and $prod_{i=1}^n (1-w_i)=f(1)=1$.



          At second, we need to find the argument of the complex number $A$. This may be done for example as follows: all pairs $w_i+w_j$ for which $w_i$ and $w_j$ are not complex conjugate are partitioned onto complex conjugate pairs. In each pair the product is positive reals. If $w_i$ and $w_j$ are complex conjugate, the sum $w_i+w_j$ is a real number whose sign is the sign of the real part of $w_i$. Therefore $A$ is the real number whose sign equals $(1)^{m/2}$, where $m$ is the number of $w$'s in the left half-plane. It is easy to see that $m/2=[k/2]$ and that $(-1)^{[k/2]}=(-1)^{k(k-1)/2}$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$









          • 4




            $begingroup$
            An alternative to your "standard trick" is to observe that $w_i + w_j = dfrac{w_i^2 - w_j^2}{w_i - w_j}$. This yields $prodlimits_{i<j} left(w_i+w_jright) = dfrac{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i^2 - w_j^2right)}{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i-w_jright)}$. But the $n$ numbers $-w_1^2, -w_2^2, ldots, -w_n^2$ are just a permutation of the $n$ numbers $w_1, w_2, ldots, w_n$, and thus $dfrac{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i^2 - w_j^2right)}{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i-w_jright)}$ equals a power of $-1$ times the sign of this permutation. Both are easy to compute.
            $endgroup$
            – darij grinberg
            7 hours ago








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Yes, this is another standard trick:) Actually possibly the shortest proof is to combine them: the absolute values equals 1 since the differences $w_i^2-w_j^2$ and $w_i-w_j$ are the same up to sign, and the sign may be obtained by looking at the argument.
            $endgroup$
            – Fedor Petrov
            7 hours ago
















          9












          $begingroup$

          Choose $n$ numbers $x_1,dots,x_n$ for which all elementary symmetric polynomials are equal to 1 and substitute them to our $f_n$. We should get zero value for odd $n$. Well, what are these numbers? The roots of $x^{n}-x^{n-1}+x^{n-2}-ldots-1=(x^{n+1}-1)/(x+1)$. This polynomial indeed has two roots with sum equal to 0 when $n$ is odd.



          If $n=2k$ is even, we substitute the roots $w_1,dots,w_n$ of the polynomial $f(x)=x^{2k}-x^{2k-1}+ldots+1=(x^{2k+1}+1)/(x+1)=(x-w_1)dots (x-w_n)$. Then your claim reads as $$A:=prod_{1leqslant i<jleqslant n} (w_i+w_j)=(-1)^{binom{k}2}.$$ This is done by the standard trick (and is well known itself). At first,
          $$
          |A|^2=prod_{i=1}^n prod_{jne i,1leqslant jleqslant n}|w_i+w_j|=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^n prod_{j=1}^n|(-w_i)-w_j|=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^n |f(w_i)|=\=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^nleft|frac{(-w_i)^{2k+1}+1}{-w_i+1}right|=1,
          $$
          since $1+(-w_i)^{2k+1}=2$ for all $i=1,2,dots,n$ and $prod_{i=1}^n (1-w_i)=f(1)=1$.



          At second, we need to find the argument of the complex number $A$. This may be done for example as follows: all pairs $w_i+w_j$ for which $w_i$ and $w_j$ are not complex conjugate are partitioned onto complex conjugate pairs. In each pair the product is positive reals. If $w_i$ and $w_j$ are complex conjugate, the sum $w_i+w_j$ is a real number whose sign is the sign of the real part of $w_i$. Therefore $A$ is the real number whose sign equals $(1)^{m/2}$, where $m$ is the number of $w$'s in the left half-plane. It is easy to see that $m/2=[k/2]$ and that $(-1)^{[k/2]}=(-1)^{k(k-1)/2}$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$









          • 4




            $begingroup$
            An alternative to your "standard trick" is to observe that $w_i + w_j = dfrac{w_i^2 - w_j^2}{w_i - w_j}$. This yields $prodlimits_{i<j} left(w_i+w_jright) = dfrac{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i^2 - w_j^2right)}{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i-w_jright)}$. But the $n$ numbers $-w_1^2, -w_2^2, ldots, -w_n^2$ are just a permutation of the $n$ numbers $w_1, w_2, ldots, w_n$, and thus $dfrac{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i^2 - w_j^2right)}{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i-w_jright)}$ equals a power of $-1$ times the sign of this permutation. Both are easy to compute.
            $endgroup$
            – darij grinberg
            7 hours ago








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Yes, this is another standard trick:) Actually possibly the shortest proof is to combine them: the absolute values equals 1 since the differences $w_i^2-w_j^2$ and $w_i-w_j$ are the same up to sign, and the sign may be obtained by looking at the argument.
            $endgroup$
            – Fedor Petrov
            7 hours ago














          9












          9








          9





          $begingroup$

          Choose $n$ numbers $x_1,dots,x_n$ for which all elementary symmetric polynomials are equal to 1 and substitute them to our $f_n$. We should get zero value for odd $n$. Well, what are these numbers? The roots of $x^{n}-x^{n-1}+x^{n-2}-ldots-1=(x^{n+1}-1)/(x+1)$. This polynomial indeed has two roots with sum equal to 0 when $n$ is odd.



          If $n=2k$ is even, we substitute the roots $w_1,dots,w_n$ of the polynomial $f(x)=x^{2k}-x^{2k-1}+ldots+1=(x^{2k+1}+1)/(x+1)=(x-w_1)dots (x-w_n)$. Then your claim reads as $$A:=prod_{1leqslant i<jleqslant n} (w_i+w_j)=(-1)^{binom{k}2}.$$ This is done by the standard trick (and is well known itself). At first,
          $$
          |A|^2=prod_{i=1}^n prod_{jne i,1leqslant jleqslant n}|w_i+w_j|=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^n prod_{j=1}^n|(-w_i)-w_j|=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^n |f(w_i)|=\=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^nleft|frac{(-w_i)^{2k+1}+1}{-w_i+1}right|=1,
          $$
          since $1+(-w_i)^{2k+1}=2$ for all $i=1,2,dots,n$ and $prod_{i=1}^n (1-w_i)=f(1)=1$.



          At second, we need to find the argument of the complex number $A$. This may be done for example as follows: all pairs $w_i+w_j$ for which $w_i$ and $w_j$ are not complex conjugate are partitioned onto complex conjugate pairs. In each pair the product is positive reals. If $w_i$ and $w_j$ are complex conjugate, the sum $w_i+w_j$ is a real number whose sign is the sign of the real part of $w_i$. Therefore $A$ is the real number whose sign equals $(1)^{m/2}$, where $m$ is the number of $w$'s in the left half-plane. It is easy to see that $m/2=[k/2]$ and that $(-1)^{[k/2]}=(-1)^{k(k-1)/2}$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Choose $n$ numbers $x_1,dots,x_n$ for which all elementary symmetric polynomials are equal to 1 and substitute them to our $f_n$. We should get zero value for odd $n$. Well, what are these numbers? The roots of $x^{n}-x^{n-1}+x^{n-2}-ldots-1=(x^{n+1}-1)/(x+1)$. This polynomial indeed has two roots with sum equal to 0 when $n$ is odd.



          If $n=2k$ is even, we substitute the roots $w_1,dots,w_n$ of the polynomial $f(x)=x^{2k}-x^{2k-1}+ldots+1=(x^{2k+1}+1)/(x+1)=(x-w_1)dots (x-w_n)$. Then your claim reads as $$A:=prod_{1leqslant i<jleqslant n} (w_i+w_j)=(-1)^{binom{k}2}.$$ This is done by the standard trick (and is well known itself). At first,
          $$
          |A|^2=prod_{i=1}^n prod_{jne i,1leqslant jleqslant n}|w_i+w_j|=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^n prod_{j=1}^n|(-w_i)-w_j|=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^n |f(w_i)|=\=2^{-n}prod_{i=1}^nleft|frac{(-w_i)^{2k+1}+1}{-w_i+1}right|=1,
          $$
          since $1+(-w_i)^{2k+1}=2$ for all $i=1,2,dots,n$ and $prod_{i=1}^n (1-w_i)=f(1)=1$.



          At second, we need to find the argument of the complex number $A$. This may be done for example as follows: all pairs $w_i+w_j$ for which $w_i$ and $w_j$ are not complex conjugate are partitioned onto complex conjugate pairs. In each pair the product is positive reals. If $w_i$ and $w_j$ are complex conjugate, the sum $w_i+w_j$ is a real number whose sign is the sign of the real part of $w_i$. Therefore $A$ is the real number whose sign equals $(1)^{m/2}$, where $m$ is the number of $w$'s in the left half-plane. It is easy to see that $m/2=[k/2]$ and that $(-1)^{[k/2]}=(-1)^{k(k-1)/2}$.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited 8 hours ago

























          answered 9 hours ago









          Fedor PetrovFedor Petrov

          50.3k6115230




          50.3k6115230








          • 4




            $begingroup$
            An alternative to your "standard trick" is to observe that $w_i + w_j = dfrac{w_i^2 - w_j^2}{w_i - w_j}$. This yields $prodlimits_{i<j} left(w_i+w_jright) = dfrac{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i^2 - w_j^2right)}{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i-w_jright)}$. But the $n$ numbers $-w_1^2, -w_2^2, ldots, -w_n^2$ are just a permutation of the $n$ numbers $w_1, w_2, ldots, w_n$, and thus $dfrac{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i^2 - w_j^2right)}{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i-w_jright)}$ equals a power of $-1$ times the sign of this permutation. Both are easy to compute.
            $endgroup$
            – darij grinberg
            7 hours ago








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Yes, this is another standard trick:) Actually possibly the shortest proof is to combine them: the absolute values equals 1 since the differences $w_i^2-w_j^2$ and $w_i-w_j$ are the same up to sign, and the sign may be obtained by looking at the argument.
            $endgroup$
            – Fedor Petrov
            7 hours ago














          • 4




            $begingroup$
            An alternative to your "standard trick" is to observe that $w_i + w_j = dfrac{w_i^2 - w_j^2}{w_i - w_j}$. This yields $prodlimits_{i<j} left(w_i+w_jright) = dfrac{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i^2 - w_j^2right)}{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i-w_jright)}$. But the $n$ numbers $-w_1^2, -w_2^2, ldots, -w_n^2$ are just a permutation of the $n$ numbers $w_1, w_2, ldots, w_n$, and thus $dfrac{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i^2 - w_j^2right)}{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i-w_jright)}$ equals a power of $-1$ times the sign of this permutation. Both are easy to compute.
            $endgroup$
            – darij grinberg
            7 hours ago








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Yes, this is another standard trick:) Actually possibly the shortest proof is to combine them: the absolute values equals 1 since the differences $w_i^2-w_j^2$ and $w_i-w_j$ are the same up to sign, and the sign may be obtained by looking at the argument.
            $endgroup$
            – Fedor Petrov
            7 hours ago








          4




          4




          $begingroup$
          An alternative to your "standard trick" is to observe that $w_i + w_j = dfrac{w_i^2 - w_j^2}{w_i - w_j}$. This yields $prodlimits_{i<j} left(w_i+w_jright) = dfrac{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i^2 - w_j^2right)}{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i-w_jright)}$. But the $n$ numbers $-w_1^2, -w_2^2, ldots, -w_n^2$ are just a permutation of the $n$ numbers $w_1, w_2, ldots, w_n$, and thus $dfrac{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i^2 - w_j^2right)}{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i-w_jright)}$ equals a power of $-1$ times the sign of this permutation. Both are easy to compute.
          $endgroup$
          – darij grinberg
          7 hours ago






          $begingroup$
          An alternative to your "standard trick" is to observe that $w_i + w_j = dfrac{w_i^2 - w_j^2}{w_i - w_j}$. This yields $prodlimits_{i<j} left(w_i+w_jright) = dfrac{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i^2 - w_j^2right)}{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i-w_jright)}$. But the $n$ numbers $-w_1^2, -w_2^2, ldots, -w_n^2$ are just a permutation of the $n$ numbers $w_1, w_2, ldots, w_n$, and thus $dfrac{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i^2 - w_j^2right)}{prodlimits_{i<j}left(w_i-w_jright)}$ equals a power of $-1$ times the sign of this permutation. Both are easy to compute.
          $endgroup$
          – darij grinberg
          7 hours ago






          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          Yes, this is another standard trick:) Actually possibly the shortest proof is to combine them: the absolute values equals 1 since the differences $w_i^2-w_j^2$ and $w_i-w_j$ are the same up to sign, and the sign may be obtained by looking at the argument.
          $endgroup$
          – Fedor Petrov
          7 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          Yes, this is another standard trick:) Actually possibly the shortest proof is to combine them: the absolute values equals 1 since the differences $w_i^2-w_j^2$ and $w_i-w_j$ are the same up to sign, and the sign may be obtained by looking at the argument.
          $endgroup$
          – Fedor Petrov
          7 hours ago


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid …



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f324489%2fthe-vanishing-of-sum-of-coefficients-symmetric-polynomials%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          -

          Popular posts from this blog

          GameSpot

          Image
          body.skin-minerva .mw-parser-output table.infobox caption{text-align:center} GameSpot 戰地風雲：惡名昭彰2在Gamespot的評論 网站类型 新聞 持有者 CBS 创始人 Pete Deemer Vince Broady Jon Epstein 网站 http://www.gamespot.com/ 注册 Optional (free and paid) 推出时间 1996年5月1日 [1] GameSpot （中国大陆：游戏基地），於1996年5月由Pete Deemer和Vince Broady創立，是一個提供新聞、評論、預告片、下載及其他的相關資訊的電子遊戲網站。GameSpot被一間後來被CNET收購的企業ZDNet所收購。根據Alexa，GameSpot.com是200個網路擁擠最嚴重的網站之一。 除了由GameSpot員工創作的內容，網站還允許用戶寫評論、網誌、之後在網路論壇分享。一些在CNET旗下的GameFAQs分享。 2004年， GameSpot被Spike TV的觀眾選上「電子遊戲賞節目」贏得「最傑出遊戲網站。 [2] 其他的遊戲網站還有IGN、1UP.com、GameSpy是它最大的競爭對手。2008年，根據Compete.com的統計，「gamespot.com」吸引了最少6000萬人的點擊率。 [3] GameSpot的主頁鏈結了到最近新聞、評論、預告、和一些有關遊戲機的入口：Wii、任天堂DS、電腦遊戲、Xbox 360、PSP、PlayStation 2、PlayStation 3。它還有一列「最受歡迎遊戲名單」，還有給用戶快速獲得遊戲資訊的搜尋器。GameSpot 還包括一些小範圍的遊戲機：任天堂64、GameCube、Game Boy Color、Game Boy Advance、Xbox、PlayStation、SEGA Saturn、Dreamcast、Neo Geo Pocket Color、N-Gage、手機遊戲。 目录 1 歷史 1.1 國際歷史 1.2 著名的員工 2 評論和分
          Read more

          connect to host localhost port 22: Connection refused

          Image
          .everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0; } 1 1 I created a Ubuntu Vagrant box and ssh'd into it. Now, created a ssh key and trying to ssh to my localhost but I get the following error. vagrant@vagrant-ubuntu-trusty-64:~$ ssh -vvvv localhost OpenSSH_6.6.1, OpenSSL 1.0.1f 6 Jan 2014 debug1: Reading configuration data /etc/ssh/ssh_config debug1: /etc/ssh/ssh_config line 19: Applying options for * debug2: ssh_connect: needpriv 0 debug1: Connecting to localhost [127.0.0.1] port 22. debug1: connect to address 127.0.0.1 port 22: Connection refused ssh: connect to host localhost port 22: Connection refused When I check the list of ports opened as follows: vagrant@vagrant-ubuntu-trusty-64:~$ s
          Read more

          Getting a Wifi WPA2 wifi connection

          Image
          .everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0; } 0 I've been trying to get a simple wifi connection ! bu I have to admit I just can't get it done ! here is what I've tried: root@MYONE:/etc# clear root@MYONE:/etc# vi wpa_supplicant.conf ctrl_interface=/var/run/wpa_supplicant ctrl_interface_group=0 update_config=1 network={ ssid="Mi Engine" psk="7407352688e4" } root@MYONE:/etc# iw wlan0 link Not connected. root@MYONE:/etc# ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 74:FE:48:3A:55:AB inet addr:192.168.178.88 Bcast:192.168.178.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::76fe:48ff:fe3a:55ab%4804152/64 Scope:Link UP BRO
          Read more