Proving that for $sigmain S_n$ one has $left|prod_{i<j} frac{sigma(j)-sigma(i)}{j-i}right|=1$












2












$begingroup$


Good evening,



Could someone please demonstrate why this property is valid?




Given $sigmain S_n$



$$left|prod_{i<j} frac{sigma(j)-sigma(i)}{j-i}right|=1$$











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Hint: Given $i,j$, find $k,l$ such that $sigma(k) = i$ and $sigma(l) = j$. Use this to show that the set of possible numerators and denominators are the same up to a sign.
    $endgroup$
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Jan 15 at 17:51
















2












$begingroup$


Good evening,



Could someone please demonstrate why this property is valid?




Given $sigmain S_n$



$$left|prod_{i<j} frac{sigma(j)-sigma(i)}{j-i}right|=1$$











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Hint: Given $i,j$, find $k,l$ such that $sigma(k) = i$ and $sigma(l) = j$. Use this to show that the set of possible numerators and denominators are the same up to a sign.
    $endgroup$
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Jan 15 at 17:51














2












2








2


1



$begingroup$


Good evening,



Could someone please demonstrate why this property is valid?




Given $sigmain S_n$



$$left|prod_{i<j} frac{sigma(j)-sigma(i)}{j-i}right|=1$$











share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Good evening,



Could someone please demonstrate why this property is valid?




Given $sigmain S_n$



$$left|prod_{i<j} frac{sigma(j)-sigma(i)}{j-i}right|=1$$








abstract-algebra combinatorics permutations






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 15 at 17:42









JMoravitz

49.6k44092




49.6k44092










asked Jan 15 at 17:24









Milena Carlini Milena Carlini

141




141








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Hint: Given $i,j$, find $k,l$ such that $sigma(k) = i$ and $sigma(l) = j$. Use this to show that the set of possible numerators and denominators are the same up to a sign.
    $endgroup$
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Jan 15 at 17:51














  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Hint: Given $i,j$, find $k,l$ such that $sigma(k) = i$ and $sigma(l) = j$. Use this to show that the set of possible numerators and denominators are the same up to a sign.
    $endgroup$
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Jan 15 at 17:51








3




3




$begingroup$
Hint: Given $i,j$, find $k,l$ such that $sigma(k) = i$ and $sigma(l) = j$. Use this to show that the set of possible numerators and denominators are the same up to a sign.
$endgroup$
– Tobias Kildetoft
Jan 15 at 17:51




$begingroup$
Hint: Given $i,j$, find $k,l$ such that $sigma(k) = i$ and $sigma(l) = j$. Use this to show that the set of possible numerators and denominators are the same up to a sign.
$endgroup$
– Tobias Kildetoft
Jan 15 at 17:51










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$

This is because $sigma$ is a permutation, and therefore a one-to-one correspondence.



You can rewrite the product in terms of numerators and denominators by way of
$$
begin{align*}
leftlvertprod_{i<j}frac{sigma(j)-sigma(i)}{j-i}rightrvert&=frac{prodlimits_{i<j}leftlvertsigma(j)-sigma(i)rightrvert}{prodlimits_{i<j}(j-i)}.
end{align*}
$$

Re-index the product in the numerator by letting $h=sigma^{-1}(i)$ and $k=sigma^{-1}(j)$. Note that we can't assume $h<k$; however, we can still index the product in the numerator over all sets ${h,k}$ of two distinct integers in $[1,n]$.



This reindexing yields
$$
prod_{i<j}lvertsigma(j)-sigma(i)rvert=prod_{{h,k}}lvert k-hrvert=prod_{h<k}(k-h).
$$






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Good evening Mr Peterson, thank you so much for replying. I can't understand the last passage of the row below 'reindexing the yields'. I'm at the first year, I apologyse for asking something that maybe is obvious.
    $endgroup$
    – Milena Carlini
    Jan 15 at 19:05










  • $begingroup$
    The middle is the product over all unordered pairs of distinct integers. All that we do to get to the right side is say "without loss of generality, assume that $k$ is the larger of the two and $h$ is the smaller."
    $endgroup$
    – Nick Peterson
    Jan 15 at 19:27



















0












$begingroup$

Detailed proof: See Exercise 5.13 (a) in my Notes on the combinatorial fundamentals of algebra, 10th of January 2019. The claim I prove there is more general: I show that if $x_1, x_2, ldots, x_n$ are any $n$ complex numbers, and if $sigma$ is any permutation of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$, then
begin{equation}
prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)
= left(-1right)^{sigma} cdot prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright) ,
label{darij1.eq.1}
tag{1}
end{equation}

where $left(-1right)^{sigma}$ denotes the sign of the permutation $sigma$.
In order to obtain your equation from eqref{darij1.eq.1}, you have to set $x_i = i$ and take absolute values (so that the sign $left(-1right)^{sigma}$ disappears, since its absolute value is $1$).



Let me sketch how to quickly prove the weaker equality
begin{equation}
left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
= left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|
label{darij1.eq.2}
tag{2}
end{equation}

(which is still sufficient for your purposes). This is what @NickPeterson has already suggested, but my more rigorous notations shall hopefully close the cracks which let confusion slip through.



First of all, the absolute value of a product equals the product of the absolute values of the factors; thus,
begin{align}
left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
= prod_{i < j} left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right| .
end{align}



Next, let $P$ be the set of all pairs $left(i, jright)$ of integers $i, j in left{1,2,ldots,nright}$ satisfying $i < j$; also, let $G$ be the set of all $2$-element subsets of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$. Note that the product sign "$prodlimits_{i < j}$" is equivalent to "$prodlimits_{left(i, jright) in P}$".



The two sets $P$ and $G$ have the same size (namely, $dbinom{n}{2} = nleft(n-1right) / 2$), and this is no coincidence: There is a bijection from $P$ to $G$. This bijection simply maps each pair $left(i, jright)$ to the two-element set $left{i, jright}$. The inverse of this bijection maps each two-element set to the pair consisting of its smaller element and its larger element (in this order).



The permutation $sigma$ of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$ gives rise to a permutation $sigma_*$ of the set $G$, which sends each two-element subset $I$ to $sigmaleft(Iright)$ (in other words, it sends each two-element subset $left{i,jright}$ to $left{sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright)right}$). Why is this a permutation of $G$? Well, again, its inverse is easy to find (it does the same thing, just with $sigma^{-1}$ instead of $sigma$). So $sigma_*$ is a permutation of $G$, i.e., a bijection from $G$ to $G$.



Now the crucial insight: If $left(i, jright) in P$, then the absolute value $left| x_i - x_j right|$ depends only on the set $left{i, jright} in G$ (not on the pair $left(i, jright) in P$). In other words, if $I in G$ is any two-element subset, then we can define a real number $f_I$ by setting
begin{align}
f_I = left| x_i - x_j right|,
qquad text{ where $I$ is written as $I = left{i, jright}$}.
end{align}

In order to formally prove this, you should recall that there are exactly two ways of writing $I$ as $I = left{i, jright}$, and check that these two ways lead to the same value of $left| x_i - x_j right|$ (easy: these two ways only differ in the order of elements, and we have $left| x_a - x_b right| = left| x_b - x_a right|$).



Note that every $left(i, jright) in P$ satisfies $sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right) = left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}$ and thus
begin{align}
f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)}
= f_{left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}}
= left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right|
label{darij1.eq.3}
tag{3}
end{align}

(by the definition of $f_{left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}}$).



Now,
begin{align}
left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
& = prod_{i < j} left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right| \
& = prod_{left(i, jright) in P} underbrace{left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right|}_{substack{ = f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)} \ left(text{by eqref{darij1.eq.3}}right)}} \
& qquad left(text{since "$prodlimits_{i < j}$" is equivalent to "$prodlimits_{left(i, jright) in P}$"}right) \
& = prod_{left(i, jright) in P} f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)} \
& = prod_{I in G} f_{sigma_* left(Iright)}
end{align}

(here, we have substituted $I$ for $left{ i, j right}$ in the product, since the map $G to P, left(i, jright) mapsto left{ i, j right}$ is a bijection).
Thus,
begin{align}
left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
= prod_{I in G} f_{sigma_* left(Iright)} = prod_{I in G} f_I
label{darij1.eq.4}
tag{4}
end{align}

(here, we have substituted $I$ for $sigma_* left(Iright)$ in the product, since $sigma_*$ is a bijection).



Note that the right hand side of eqref{darij1.eq.4} does not depend on $sigma$. Applying the same reasoning to the permutation $operatorname{id}$ instead of $sigma$, we thus obtain
begin{align}
left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{operatorname{id}left(iright)} - x_{operatorname{id}left(jright)}right)right|
= prod_{I in G} f_I .
end{align}

In other words,
begin{align}
left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|
= prod_{I in G} f_I .
end{align}

Comparing this equality with eqref{darij1.eq.4}, we obtain
$left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
= left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|$
.
Thus, eqref{darij1.eq.2} is proven.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$














    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    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%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3074668%2fproving-that-for-sigma-in-s-n-one-has-left-prod-ij-frac-sigmaj-sig%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    1












    $begingroup$

    This is because $sigma$ is a permutation, and therefore a one-to-one correspondence.



    You can rewrite the product in terms of numerators and denominators by way of
    $$
    begin{align*}
    leftlvertprod_{i<j}frac{sigma(j)-sigma(i)}{j-i}rightrvert&=frac{prodlimits_{i<j}leftlvertsigma(j)-sigma(i)rightrvert}{prodlimits_{i<j}(j-i)}.
    end{align*}
    $$

    Re-index the product in the numerator by letting $h=sigma^{-1}(i)$ and $k=sigma^{-1}(j)$. Note that we can't assume $h<k$; however, we can still index the product in the numerator over all sets ${h,k}$ of two distinct integers in $[1,n]$.



    This reindexing yields
    $$
    prod_{i<j}lvertsigma(j)-sigma(i)rvert=prod_{{h,k}}lvert k-hrvert=prod_{h<k}(k-h).
    $$






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Good evening Mr Peterson, thank you so much for replying. I can't understand the last passage of the row below 'reindexing the yields'. I'm at the first year, I apologyse for asking something that maybe is obvious.
      $endgroup$
      – Milena Carlini
      Jan 15 at 19:05










    • $begingroup$
      The middle is the product over all unordered pairs of distinct integers. All that we do to get to the right side is say "without loss of generality, assume that $k$ is the larger of the two and $h$ is the smaller."
      $endgroup$
      – Nick Peterson
      Jan 15 at 19:27
















    1












    $begingroup$

    This is because $sigma$ is a permutation, and therefore a one-to-one correspondence.



    You can rewrite the product in terms of numerators and denominators by way of
    $$
    begin{align*}
    leftlvertprod_{i<j}frac{sigma(j)-sigma(i)}{j-i}rightrvert&=frac{prodlimits_{i<j}leftlvertsigma(j)-sigma(i)rightrvert}{prodlimits_{i<j}(j-i)}.
    end{align*}
    $$

    Re-index the product in the numerator by letting $h=sigma^{-1}(i)$ and $k=sigma^{-1}(j)$. Note that we can't assume $h<k$; however, we can still index the product in the numerator over all sets ${h,k}$ of two distinct integers in $[1,n]$.



    This reindexing yields
    $$
    prod_{i<j}lvertsigma(j)-sigma(i)rvert=prod_{{h,k}}lvert k-hrvert=prod_{h<k}(k-h).
    $$






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Good evening Mr Peterson, thank you so much for replying. I can't understand the last passage of the row below 'reindexing the yields'. I'm at the first year, I apologyse for asking something that maybe is obvious.
      $endgroup$
      – Milena Carlini
      Jan 15 at 19:05










    • $begingroup$
      The middle is the product over all unordered pairs of distinct integers. All that we do to get to the right side is say "without loss of generality, assume that $k$ is the larger of the two and $h$ is the smaller."
      $endgroup$
      – Nick Peterson
      Jan 15 at 19:27














    1












    1








    1





    $begingroup$

    This is because $sigma$ is a permutation, and therefore a one-to-one correspondence.



    You can rewrite the product in terms of numerators and denominators by way of
    $$
    begin{align*}
    leftlvertprod_{i<j}frac{sigma(j)-sigma(i)}{j-i}rightrvert&=frac{prodlimits_{i<j}leftlvertsigma(j)-sigma(i)rightrvert}{prodlimits_{i<j}(j-i)}.
    end{align*}
    $$

    Re-index the product in the numerator by letting $h=sigma^{-1}(i)$ and $k=sigma^{-1}(j)$. Note that we can't assume $h<k$; however, we can still index the product in the numerator over all sets ${h,k}$ of two distinct integers in $[1,n]$.



    This reindexing yields
    $$
    prod_{i<j}lvertsigma(j)-sigma(i)rvert=prod_{{h,k}}lvert k-hrvert=prod_{h<k}(k-h).
    $$






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    This is because $sigma$ is a permutation, and therefore a one-to-one correspondence.



    You can rewrite the product in terms of numerators and denominators by way of
    $$
    begin{align*}
    leftlvertprod_{i<j}frac{sigma(j)-sigma(i)}{j-i}rightrvert&=frac{prodlimits_{i<j}leftlvertsigma(j)-sigma(i)rightrvert}{prodlimits_{i<j}(j-i)}.
    end{align*}
    $$

    Re-index the product in the numerator by letting $h=sigma^{-1}(i)$ and $k=sigma^{-1}(j)$. Note that we can't assume $h<k$; however, we can still index the product in the numerator over all sets ${h,k}$ of two distinct integers in $[1,n]$.



    This reindexing yields
    $$
    prod_{i<j}lvertsigma(j)-sigma(i)rvert=prod_{{h,k}}lvert k-hrvert=prod_{h<k}(k-h).
    $$







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Jan 15 at 19:02

























    answered Jan 15 at 17:59









    Nick PetersonNick Peterson

    26.9k23962




    26.9k23962












    • $begingroup$
      Good evening Mr Peterson, thank you so much for replying. I can't understand the last passage of the row below 'reindexing the yields'. I'm at the first year, I apologyse for asking something that maybe is obvious.
      $endgroup$
      – Milena Carlini
      Jan 15 at 19:05










    • $begingroup$
      The middle is the product over all unordered pairs of distinct integers. All that we do to get to the right side is say "without loss of generality, assume that $k$ is the larger of the two and $h$ is the smaller."
      $endgroup$
      – Nick Peterson
      Jan 15 at 19:27


















    • $begingroup$
      Good evening Mr Peterson, thank you so much for replying. I can't understand the last passage of the row below 'reindexing the yields'. I'm at the first year, I apologyse for asking something that maybe is obvious.
      $endgroup$
      – Milena Carlini
      Jan 15 at 19:05










    • $begingroup$
      The middle is the product over all unordered pairs of distinct integers. All that we do to get to the right side is say "without loss of generality, assume that $k$ is the larger of the two and $h$ is the smaller."
      $endgroup$
      – Nick Peterson
      Jan 15 at 19:27
















    $begingroup$
    Good evening Mr Peterson, thank you so much for replying. I can't understand the last passage of the row below 'reindexing the yields'. I'm at the first year, I apologyse for asking something that maybe is obvious.
    $endgroup$
    – Milena Carlini
    Jan 15 at 19:05




    $begingroup$
    Good evening Mr Peterson, thank you so much for replying. I can't understand the last passage of the row below 'reindexing the yields'. I'm at the first year, I apologyse for asking something that maybe is obvious.
    $endgroup$
    – Milena Carlini
    Jan 15 at 19:05












    $begingroup$
    The middle is the product over all unordered pairs of distinct integers. All that we do to get to the right side is say "without loss of generality, assume that $k$ is the larger of the two and $h$ is the smaller."
    $endgroup$
    – Nick Peterson
    Jan 15 at 19:27




    $begingroup$
    The middle is the product over all unordered pairs of distinct integers. All that we do to get to the right side is say "without loss of generality, assume that $k$ is the larger of the two and $h$ is the smaller."
    $endgroup$
    – Nick Peterson
    Jan 15 at 19:27











    0












    $begingroup$

    Detailed proof: See Exercise 5.13 (a) in my Notes on the combinatorial fundamentals of algebra, 10th of January 2019. The claim I prove there is more general: I show that if $x_1, x_2, ldots, x_n$ are any $n$ complex numbers, and if $sigma$ is any permutation of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$, then
    begin{equation}
    prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)
    = left(-1right)^{sigma} cdot prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright) ,
    label{darij1.eq.1}
    tag{1}
    end{equation}

    where $left(-1right)^{sigma}$ denotes the sign of the permutation $sigma$.
    In order to obtain your equation from eqref{darij1.eq.1}, you have to set $x_i = i$ and take absolute values (so that the sign $left(-1right)^{sigma}$ disappears, since its absolute value is $1$).



    Let me sketch how to quickly prove the weaker equality
    begin{equation}
    left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
    = left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|
    label{darij1.eq.2}
    tag{2}
    end{equation}

    (which is still sufficient for your purposes). This is what @NickPeterson has already suggested, but my more rigorous notations shall hopefully close the cracks which let confusion slip through.



    First of all, the absolute value of a product equals the product of the absolute values of the factors; thus,
    begin{align}
    left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
    = prod_{i < j} left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right| .
    end{align}



    Next, let $P$ be the set of all pairs $left(i, jright)$ of integers $i, j in left{1,2,ldots,nright}$ satisfying $i < j$; also, let $G$ be the set of all $2$-element subsets of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$. Note that the product sign "$prodlimits_{i < j}$" is equivalent to "$prodlimits_{left(i, jright) in P}$".



    The two sets $P$ and $G$ have the same size (namely, $dbinom{n}{2} = nleft(n-1right) / 2$), and this is no coincidence: There is a bijection from $P$ to $G$. This bijection simply maps each pair $left(i, jright)$ to the two-element set $left{i, jright}$. The inverse of this bijection maps each two-element set to the pair consisting of its smaller element and its larger element (in this order).



    The permutation $sigma$ of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$ gives rise to a permutation $sigma_*$ of the set $G$, which sends each two-element subset $I$ to $sigmaleft(Iright)$ (in other words, it sends each two-element subset $left{i,jright}$ to $left{sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright)right}$). Why is this a permutation of $G$? Well, again, its inverse is easy to find (it does the same thing, just with $sigma^{-1}$ instead of $sigma$). So $sigma_*$ is a permutation of $G$, i.e., a bijection from $G$ to $G$.



    Now the crucial insight: If $left(i, jright) in P$, then the absolute value $left| x_i - x_j right|$ depends only on the set $left{i, jright} in G$ (not on the pair $left(i, jright) in P$). In other words, if $I in G$ is any two-element subset, then we can define a real number $f_I$ by setting
    begin{align}
    f_I = left| x_i - x_j right|,
    qquad text{ where $I$ is written as $I = left{i, jright}$}.
    end{align}

    In order to formally prove this, you should recall that there are exactly two ways of writing $I$ as $I = left{i, jright}$, and check that these two ways lead to the same value of $left| x_i - x_j right|$ (easy: these two ways only differ in the order of elements, and we have $left| x_a - x_b right| = left| x_b - x_a right|$).



    Note that every $left(i, jright) in P$ satisfies $sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right) = left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}$ and thus
    begin{align}
    f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)}
    = f_{left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}}
    = left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right|
    label{darij1.eq.3}
    tag{3}
    end{align}

    (by the definition of $f_{left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}}$).



    Now,
    begin{align}
    left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
    & = prod_{i < j} left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right| \
    & = prod_{left(i, jright) in P} underbrace{left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right|}_{substack{ = f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)} \ left(text{by eqref{darij1.eq.3}}right)}} \
    & qquad left(text{since "$prodlimits_{i < j}$" is equivalent to "$prodlimits_{left(i, jright) in P}$"}right) \
    & = prod_{left(i, jright) in P} f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)} \
    & = prod_{I in G} f_{sigma_* left(Iright)}
    end{align}

    (here, we have substituted $I$ for $left{ i, j right}$ in the product, since the map $G to P, left(i, jright) mapsto left{ i, j right}$ is a bijection).
    Thus,
    begin{align}
    left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
    = prod_{I in G} f_{sigma_* left(Iright)} = prod_{I in G} f_I
    label{darij1.eq.4}
    tag{4}
    end{align}

    (here, we have substituted $I$ for $sigma_* left(Iright)$ in the product, since $sigma_*$ is a bijection).



    Note that the right hand side of eqref{darij1.eq.4} does not depend on $sigma$. Applying the same reasoning to the permutation $operatorname{id}$ instead of $sigma$, we thus obtain
    begin{align}
    left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{operatorname{id}left(iright)} - x_{operatorname{id}left(jright)}right)right|
    = prod_{I in G} f_I .
    end{align}

    In other words,
    begin{align}
    left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|
    = prod_{I in G} f_I .
    end{align}

    Comparing this equality with eqref{darij1.eq.4}, we obtain
    $left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
    = left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|$
    .
    Thus, eqref{darij1.eq.2} is proven.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      Detailed proof: See Exercise 5.13 (a) in my Notes on the combinatorial fundamentals of algebra, 10th of January 2019. The claim I prove there is more general: I show that if $x_1, x_2, ldots, x_n$ are any $n$ complex numbers, and if $sigma$ is any permutation of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$, then
      begin{equation}
      prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)
      = left(-1right)^{sigma} cdot prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright) ,
      label{darij1.eq.1}
      tag{1}
      end{equation}

      where $left(-1right)^{sigma}$ denotes the sign of the permutation $sigma$.
      In order to obtain your equation from eqref{darij1.eq.1}, you have to set $x_i = i$ and take absolute values (so that the sign $left(-1right)^{sigma}$ disappears, since its absolute value is $1$).



      Let me sketch how to quickly prove the weaker equality
      begin{equation}
      left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
      = left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|
      label{darij1.eq.2}
      tag{2}
      end{equation}

      (which is still sufficient for your purposes). This is what @NickPeterson has already suggested, but my more rigorous notations shall hopefully close the cracks which let confusion slip through.



      First of all, the absolute value of a product equals the product of the absolute values of the factors; thus,
      begin{align}
      left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
      = prod_{i < j} left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right| .
      end{align}



      Next, let $P$ be the set of all pairs $left(i, jright)$ of integers $i, j in left{1,2,ldots,nright}$ satisfying $i < j$; also, let $G$ be the set of all $2$-element subsets of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$. Note that the product sign "$prodlimits_{i < j}$" is equivalent to "$prodlimits_{left(i, jright) in P}$".



      The two sets $P$ and $G$ have the same size (namely, $dbinom{n}{2} = nleft(n-1right) / 2$), and this is no coincidence: There is a bijection from $P$ to $G$. This bijection simply maps each pair $left(i, jright)$ to the two-element set $left{i, jright}$. The inverse of this bijection maps each two-element set to the pair consisting of its smaller element and its larger element (in this order).



      The permutation $sigma$ of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$ gives rise to a permutation $sigma_*$ of the set $G$, which sends each two-element subset $I$ to $sigmaleft(Iright)$ (in other words, it sends each two-element subset $left{i,jright}$ to $left{sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright)right}$). Why is this a permutation of $G$? Well, again, its inverse is easy to find (it does the same thing, just with $sigma^{-1}$ instead of $sigma$). So $sigma_*$ is a permutation of $G$, i.e., a bijection from $G$ to $G$.



      Now the crucial insight: If $left(i, jright) in P$, then the absolute value $left| x_i - x_j right|$ depends only on the set $left{i, jright} in G$ (not on the pair $left(i, jright) in P$). In other words, if $I in G$ is any two-element subset, then we can define a real number $f_I$ by setting
      begin{align}
      f_I = left| x_i - x_j right|,
      qquad text{ where $I$ is written as $I = left{i, jright}$}.
      end{align}

      In order to formally prove this, you should recall that there are exactly two ways of writing $I$ as $I = left{i, jright}$, and check that these two ways lead to the same value of $left| x_i - x_j right|$ (easy: these two ways only differ in the order of elements, and we have $left| x_a - x_b right| = left| x_b - x_a right|$).



      Note that every $left(i, jright) in P$ satisfies $sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right) = left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}$ and thus
      begin{align}
      f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)}
      = f_{left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}}
      = left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right|
      label{darij1.eq.3}
      tag{3}
      end{align}

      (by the definition of $f_{left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}}$).



      Now,
      begin{align}
      left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
      & = prod_{i < j} left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right| \
      & = prod_{left(i, jright) in P} underbrace{left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right|}_{substack{ = f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)} \ left(text{by eqref{darij1.eq.3}}right)}} \
      & qquad left(text{since "$prodlimits_{i < j}$" is equivalent to "$prodlimits_{left(i, jright) in P}$"}right) \
      & = prod_{left(i, jright) in P} f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)} \
      & = prod_{I in G} f_{sigma_* left(Iright)}
      end{align}

      (here, we have substituted $I$ for $left{ i, j right}$ in the product, since the map $G to P, left(i, jright) mapsto left{ i, j right}$ is a bijection).
      Thus,
      begin{align}
      left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
      = prod_{I in G} f_{sigma_* left(Iright)} = prod_{I in G} f_I
      label{darij1.eq.4}
      tag{4}
      end{align}

      (here, we have substituted $I$ for $sigma_* left(Iright)$ in the product, since $sigma_*$ is a bijection).



      Note that the right hand side of eqref{darij1.eq.4} does not depend on $sigma$. Applying the same reasoning to the permutation $operatorname{id}$ instead of $sigma$, we thus obtain
      begin{align}
      left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{operatorname{id}left(iright)} - x_{operatorname{id}left(jright)}right)right|
      = prod_{I in G} f_I .
      end{align}

      In other words,
      begin{align}
      left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|
      = prod_{I in G} f_I .
      end{align}

      Comparing this equality with eqref{darij1.eq.4}, we obtain
      $left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
      = left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|$
      .
      Thus, eqref{darij1.eq.2} is proven.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        Detailed proof: See Exercise 5.13 (a) in my Notes on the combinatorial fundamentals of algebra, 10th of January 2019. The claim I prove there is more general: I show that if $x_1, x_2, ldots, x_n$ are any $n$ complex numbers, and if $sigma$ is any permutation of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$, then
        begin{equation}
        prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)
        = left(-1right)^{sigma} cdot prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright) ,
        label{darij1.eq.1}
        tag{1}
        end{equation}

        where $left(-1right)^{sigma}$ denotes the sign of the permutation $sigma$.
        In order to obtain your equation from eqref{darij1.eq.1}, you have to set $x_i = i$ and take absolute values (so that the sign $left(-1right)^{sigma}$ disappears, since its absolute value is $1$).



        Let me sketch how to quickly prove the weaker equality
        begin{equation}
        left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
        = left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|
        label{darij1.eq.2}
        tag{2}
        end{equation}

        (which is still sufficient for your purposes). This is what @NickPeterson has already suggested, but my more rigorous notations shall hopefully close the cracks which let confusion slip through.



        First of all, the absolute value of a product equals the product of the absolute values of the factors; thus,
        begin{align}
        left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
        = prod_{i < j} left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right| .
        end{align}



        Next, let $P$ be the set of all pairs $left(i, jright)$ of integers $i, j in left{1,2,ldots,nright}$ satisfying $i < j$; also, let $G$ be the set of all $2$-element subsets of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$. Note that the product sign "$prodlimits_{i < j}$" is equivalent to "$prodlimits_{left(i, jright) in P}$".



        The two sets $P$ and $G$ have the same size (namely, $dbinom{n}{2} = nleft(n-1right) / 2$), and this is no coincidence: There is a bijection from $P$ to $G$. This bijection simply maps each pair $left(i, jright)$ to the two-element set $left{i, jright}$. The inverse of this bijection maps each two-element set to the pair consisting of its smaller element and its larger element (in this order).



        The permutation $sigma$ of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$ gives rise to a permutation $sigma_*$ of the set $G$, which sends each two-element subset $I$ to $sigmaleft(Iright)$ (in other words, it sends each two-element subset $left{i,jright}$ to $left{sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright)right}$). Why is this a permutation of $G$? Well, again, its inverse is easy to find (it does the same thing, just with $sigma^{-1}$ instead of $sigma$). So $sigma_*$ is a permutation of $G$, i.e., a bijection from $G$ to $G$.



        Now the crucial insight: If $left(i, jright) in P$, then the absolute value $left| x_i - x_j right|$ depends only on the set $left{i, jright} in G$ (not on the pair $left(i, jright) in P$). In other words, if $I in G$ is any two-element subset, then we can define a real number $f_I$ by setting
        begin{align}
        f_I = left| x_i - x_j right|,
        qquad text{ where $I$ is written as $I = left{i, jright}$}.
        end{align}

        In order to formally prove this, you should recall that there are exactly two ways of writing $I$ as $I = left{i, jright}$, and check that these two ways lead to the same value of $left| x_i - x_j right|$ (easy: these two ways only differ in the order of elements, and we have $left| x_a - x_b right| = left| x_b - x_a right|$).



        Note that every $left(i, jright) in P$ satisfies $sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right) = left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}$ and thus
        begin{align}
        f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)}
        = f_{left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}}
        = left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right|
        label{darij1.eq.3}
        tag{3}
        end{align}

        (by the definition of $f_{left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}}$).



        Now,
        begin{align}
        left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
        & = prod_{i < j} left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right| \
        & = prod_{left(i, jright) in P} underbrace{left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right|}_{substack{ = f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)} \ left(text{by eqref{darij1.eq.3}}right)}} \
        & qquad left(text{since "$prodlimits_{i < j}$" is equivalent to "$prodlimits_{left(i, jright) in P}$"}right) \
        & = prod_{left(i, jright) in P} f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)} \
        & = prod_{I in G} f_{sigma_* left(Iright)}
        end{align}

        (here, we have substituted $I$ for $left{ i, j right}$ in the product, since the map $G to P, left(i, jright) mapsto left{ i, j right}$ is a bijection).
        Thus,
        begin{align}
        left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
        = prod_{I in G} f_{sigma_* left(Iright)} = prod_{I in G} f_I
        label{darij1.eq.4}
        tag{4}
        end{align}

        (here, we have substituted $I$ for $sigma_* left(Iright)$ in the product, since $sigma_*$ is a bijection).



        Note that the right hand side of eqref{darij1.eq.4} does not depend on $sigma$. Applying the same reasoning to the permutation $operatorname{id}$ instead of $sigma$, we thus obtain
        begin{align}
        left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{operatorname{id}left(iright)} - x_{operatorname{id}left(jright)}right)right|
        = prod_{I in G} f_I .
        end{align}

        In other words,
        begin{align}
        left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|
        = prod_{I in G} f_I .
        end{align}

        Comparing this equality with eqref{darij1.eq.4}, we obtain
        $left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
        = left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|$
        .
        Thus, eqref{darij1.eq.2} is proven.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Detailed proof: See Exercise 5.13 (a) in my Notes on the combinatorial fundamentals of algebra, 10th of January 2019. The claim I prove there is more general: I show that if $x_1, x_2, ldots, x_n$ are any $n$ complex numbers, and if $sigma$ is any permutation of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$, then
        begin{equation}
        prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)
        = left(-1right)^{sigma} cdot prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright) ,
        label{darij1.eq.1}
        tag{1}
        end{equation}

        where $left(-1right)^{sigma}$ denotes the sign of the permutation $sigma$.
        In order to obtain your equation from eqref{darij1.eq.1}, you have to set $x_i = i$ and take absolute values (so that the sign $left(-1right)^{sigma}$ disappears, since its absolute value is $1$).



        Let me sketch how to quickly prove the weaker equality
        begin{equation}
        left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
        = left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|
        label{darij1.eq.2}
        tag{2}
        end{equation}

        (which is still sufficient for your purposes). This is what @NickPeterson has already suggested, but my more rigorous notations shall hopefully close the cracks which let confusion slip through.



        First of all, the absolute value of a product equals the product of the absolute values of the factors; thus,
        begin{align}
        left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
        = prod_{i < j} left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right| .
        end{align}



        Next, let $P$ be the set of all pairs $left(i, jright)$ of integers $i, j in left{1,2,ldots,nright}$ satisfying $i < j$; also, let $G$ be the set of all $2$-element subsets of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$. Note that the product sign "$prodlimits_{i < j}$" is equivalent to "$prodlimits_{left(i, jright) in P}$".



        The two sets $P$ and $G$ have the same size (namely, $dbinom{n}{2} = nleft(n-1right) / 2$), and this is no coincidence: There is a bijection from $P$ to $G$. This bijection simply maps each pair $left(i, jright)$ to the two-element set $left{i, jright}$. The inverse of this bijection maps each two-element set to the pair consisting of its smaller element and its larger element (in this order).



        The permutation $sigma$ of $left{1,2,ldots,nright}$ gives rise to a permutation $sigma_*$ of the set $G$, which sends each two-element subset $I$ to $sigmaleft(Iright)$ (in other words, it sends each two-element subset $left{i,jright}$ to $left{sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright)right}$). Why is this a permutation of $G$? Well, again, its inverse is easy to find (it does the same thing, just with $sigma^{-1}$ instead of $sigma$). So $sigma_*$ is a permutation of $G$, i.e., a bijection from $G$ to $G$.



        Now the crucial insight: If $left(i, jright) in P$, then the absolute value $left| x_i - x_j right|$ depends only on the set $left{i, jright} in G$ (not on the pair $left(i, jright) in P$). In other words, if $I in G$ is any two-element subset, then we can define a real number $f_I$ by setting
        begin{align}
        f_I = left| x_i - x_j right|,
        qquad text{ where $I$ is written as $I = left{i, jright}$}.
        end{align}

        In order to formally prove this, you should recall that there are exactly two ways of writing $I$ as $I = left{i, jright}$, and check that these two ways lead to the same value of $left| x_i - x_j right|$ (easy: these two ways only differ in the order of elements, and we have $left| x_a - x_b right| = left| x_b - x_a right|$).



        Note that every $left(i, jright) in P$ satisfies $sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right) = left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}$ and thus
        begin{align}
        f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)}
        = f_{left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}}
        = left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right|
        label{darij1.eq.3}
        tag{3}
        end{align}

        (by the definition of $f_{left{ sigmaleft(iright), sigmaleft(jright) right}}$).



        Now,
        begin{align}
        left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
        & = prod_{i < j} left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right| \
        & = prod_{left(i, jright) in P} underbrace{left| x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)} right|}_{substack{ = f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)} \ left(text{by eqref{darij1.eq.3}}right)}} \
        & qquad left(text{since "$prodlimits_{i < j}$" is equivalent to "$prodlimits_{left(i, jright) in P}$"}right) \
        & = prod_{left(i, jright) in P} f_{sigma_* left( left{ i, j right} right)} \
        & = prod_{I in G} f_{sigma_* left(Iright)}
        end{align}

        (here, we have substituted $I$ for $left{ i, j right}$ in the product, since the map $G to P, left(i, jright) mapsto left{ i, j right}$ is a bijection).
        Thus,
        begin{align}
        left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
        = prod_{I in G} f_{sigma_* left(Iright)} = prod_{I in G} f_I
        label{darij1.eq.4}
        tag{4}
        end{align}

        (here, we have substituted $I$ for $sigma_* left(Iright)$ in the product, since $sigma_*$ is a bijection).



        Note that the right hand side of eqref{darij1.eq.4} does not depend on $sigma$. Applying the same reasoning to the permutation $operatorname{id}$ instead of $sigma$, we thus obtain
        begin{align}
        left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{operatorname{id}left(iright)} - x_{operatorname{id}left(jright)}right)right|
        = prod_{I in G} f_I .
        end{align}

        In other words,
        begin{align}
        left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|
        = prod_{I in G} f_I .
        end{align}

        Comparing this equality with eqref{darij1.eq.4}, we obtain
        $left|prod_{i < j} left(x_{sigmaleft(iright)} - x_{sigmaleft(jright)}right)right|
        = left|prod_{i < j} left(x_i - x_jright)right|$
        .
        Thus, eqref{darij1.eq.2} is proven.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Jan 15 at 20:44









        darij grinbergdarij grinberg

        11.6k33168




        11.6k33168






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • 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%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3074668%2fproving-that-for-sigma-in-s-n-one-has-left-prod-ij-frac-sigmaj-sig%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

            Bressuire

            Cabo Verde

            Gyllenstierna