arxiv: v2 [math.ca] 7 Mar 2008

Transcription

1 On an identity by Chaundy and Bullard. I arxiv: v2 [math.ca] 7 Mar 2008 Tom H. Koornwinder and Michael J. Schlosser Dedicated to Richard Askey on the occasion of his 75th birthday Abstract An identity by Chaundy and Bullard writes /( x n (n =, 2,... as a sum of two truncated binomial series. A special case of this identity was rediscovered by I. Daubechies, while she was setting up the theory of wavelets of compact support. We present at least six different proofs of this identity. The paper concludes with a multivariable analogue of the identity. Introduction Chaundy and Bullard noted in passing the identity = ( x n+ m (n + k x k + x m+ ( x k, (. as a side result in their 960 paper John Smith s problem, see [3, p.256]. Here m,n are nonnegative integers and { a(a +... (a + k if k =,2,..., (a k := if k = 0, is the Pochhammer symbol. This formula was rediscovered (partially or completely several times: In 97 Herrmann [7] interpreted m n + k p m,n (x := ( x n+ x k (.2 k (which is the first of the two finite sums on the right of (. as the polynomial of degree m + n + which has a zero of order n + at x = and such that p m,n (x has a zero of order m + at x = 0. He proved this by induction with respect to n (although we think that he meant induction with respect to m + n. Essentially, although not explicitly given in [7], Herrmann s result implies that which is (.. p m,n (x + p n,m ( x =, (.3

2 In 988 Daubechies [4, Lemma 4.4], see also [5, (6..7, (6..2], rediscovered the case m = n of (.. This identity was a crucial step for her in order to arrive at the form of the function m 0 (ξ which is associated with the wavelets of compact support named after her. Multiplication of both sides of (. by ( x n gives ( x n = m (n + k x k + x m+ ( x k n. (.4 This identity is the case m = 0 of the identity at the end of section 8 in Vidūnas [0], where it is given as a three-term identity for three Gauß hypergeometric functions satisfying the same hyperbolic differential equation in the most degenerate case (trivial monodromy group. It was also essentially identity (.4 which was rediscovered by Pieter de Jong (Netherlands, who is studying the mathematical foundations of architecture. It was by his communication to the first author in 2007 that we first became aware of this identity. See also de Jong s forthcoming preprint [8]. The following sections contain six different proofs of (. (or even more, since some Remarks also imply proofs. The proof in section 2 is the original proof by Chaundy and Bullard [3]. Section 3, following Daubechies [5, 6.], gives essentially the same proof, but in the more abstract setting of Bézout s identitity. The proof in section 4 is by repeated differentiation of (4. (the method used by Pieter de Jong. The proof in section 5 is by induction with respect to m + n. The proof in section 6 uses generating functions. It was communicated to us by Helmut Prodinger. In section 7 the beta integral and Pfaff s identity for a terminating Gauß hypergeometric function are used. The proof in section 8 also uses hypergeometric functions: a combination of identities by Euler and Pfaff. There we also observe that the three terms in the identity (.4 all solve a very special (degenerate case of the hypergeometric differential equation. In section 9 we obtain (.4 as a limit case of a more general three-term identity for hypergeometric function, where the three terms all solve a hypergeometric differential equation. Section 0 gives a multivariable analogue of (.. It is proved by the generating functions method, analogous to the proof for (. in section 6. Finally, we give in section a partial differential equation satisfied by all terms in the multivariable analogue (0.4 of (.. In a forthcoming paper we will give various analogues and generalizations of (. in the q-case. Acknowledgements We thank Pieter de Jong for showing us his identity, Helmut Prodinger for communicating us his proof of the identity, and Oleg Ogievetsky for a helpful remark. The second author was partly supported by FWF Austrian Science Fund grants P7563-N3, and S9607 (the latter is part of the Austrian National Research Network Analytic Combinatorics and Probabilistic Number Theory. 2

3 2 Chaundy & Bullard s original proof Fix m and n. By the binomial theorem we have (x + y m+n+ = x m+ U(x,y + y n+ V (x,y, (2. where U(x,y and V (x,y are homogeneous polynomials of degree n and m, respectively. Put x + y :=. Then = x m+ U(x, x + ( x n+ V (x, x, (2.2 and multiplication by ( x n yields ( x n = V (x, x + x m+ ( x n U(x, x. (2.3 Expand both sides of (2.3 as a power series in x, convergent for x <. Then V (x, x is a polynomial of degree m in x and all terms in the power series of x m+ ( x n U(x, x have degree m +, Hence V (x, x equals the power series of ( x n truncated after the term of x m, i.e., m (n + k V (x, x = x k. (2.4 Similarly, so = ( y m+ U( y,y + y n+ V ( y,y, ( y m = U( y,y + y n+ ( y m V ( y,y, U( y,y = Then substitution of (2.4 and (2.5 (with y := x in (2.2 proves (.. Remark 2.. From (2. we have Hence V (x,y = m m + n + x k y m k. k V (x, x = ( x m m From (2.4 and (2.6 we obtain the identity m (n + k x k = ( x m m 3 ( m n k ( m n k y k. (2.5 ( x k. (2.6 x ( x k. (2.7 x

4 In terms of Gauß hypergeometric series (see section 7, this can be written as m,n + m, m n 2F m ;x = ( x m x 2F ;, (2.8 m x which is the limit case a := m, b := n +, c m of Pfaff s transformation formula a,b a,c b 2F c ;x = ( x a x 2F ;, (2.9 c x see [, (2.2.6]. 3 A proof using Bézout s identity Daubechies [5, 6.], in the symmetric case m = n, essentially gave the same proof as Chaundy & Bullard (see section 2 above, but phrased more abstractly in terms of Bézout s identity. Here we write her proof, straightforwardly extended to the case of general m,n. Let F be a field and let p and p 2 be polynomials in F[x] of degree n,n 2, respectively, and with no common zeros. Then there exist unique polynomials q,q 2 of degree n 2, n, respectively, such that Bézout s identity p (xq (x + p 2 (xq 2 (x = (3. is satisfied. The proof is based on the Euclidean algorithm, see for instance Daubechies [5, Theorem 6..]. In particular, for each m,n there exist unique polynomials q m,n and r m,n of degree m,n, respectively, such that = ( x n+ q m,n (x + x m+ r m,n (x. (3.2 But then the identity = ( x n+ r n,m ( x + x m+ q n,m ( x will also hold. Hence, by uniqueness (q m,n (x and r n,m ( x have the same degree m we obtain Identity (3.2 implies that Hence q m,n (x = r n,m ( x. ( x n = q m,n (x + ( x n x m+ r m,n (x. ( x n = q m,n (x + O(x m+ as x 0. Now the proof of (. is completed as in section 2. 4

5 Remark 3.. Bézout s identity (3. (p (x,p 2 (x without common zeros can be equivalently written as the partial fraction decomposition p (xp 2 (x = q 2(x p (x + q (x p 2 (x. In particular, (. is equivalent to the partial fraction decomposition m (n+ k x m+ ( x n+ = x k n (m+ k ( x k x m+ + ( x n+. (3.3 We thank Oleg Ogievetsky for this observation. 4 A proof by repeated differentiation Here we give a proof of (.4 which was sketched by Pieter de Jong in [8]. First note that the case n = 0 of (.4 is evident. It is essentially the summation formula for the terminating geometric series: x = + x + x2 + + x m + xm+ x. (4. As pointed out by Pieter de Jong in [8, 2], repeated differentiation of (4. (and rearrangement of terms on the right-hand side involving negative powers of x after each differentation yields (.4 (with m replaced by m n. Let us make this proof of (.4 rigorous by induction with respect to n (for each n for general m. For n = 0 we have (4., which is evident. Now apply the operator (n + d/dx to both sides of (.4. The left-hand side becomes ( x n 2, the right-hand side becomes m (n + 2 k x k +x m m + n + ( x k n +x m+ n k + n + ( x k n 2. So we will have proved (.4 with n replaced by n + and m replaced by m if we can show that x m m + n + ( x k n + x m+ n k + n + ( x k n 2 (4.2 is equal to n+ x m (m k ( x k n 2. (4.3 5

6 In order to show this, rewrite x m+ in the second term of (4.2 as x m+ = x m x m ( x, by which (4.2 becomes x m n+ = x m m n + k n + k= m n + k n + = x m ( x n 2 + x m ( x k n + x m n k + n + ( x k n 2 + x m n k + (k! n + k= (m k ( x k n 2 + (m n+ (n +! xm ( x, which equals (4.3. This completes the induction step. 5 A proof by induction ( x k n 2 ( x k n 2 We have to prove (.3, with p m,n (x given by (.2. First note that (.3 holds for n = 0, and hence, by symmetry, also for m = 0. Indeed, p m,0 (x = ( x m x k = ( x xm+ x = x m+, and p 0,m ( x = x m+, so p m,0 (x + p 0,m ( x =. Now we prove (.3 by induction with respect to m + n. We already saw that it holds for m + n = 0, i.e., for m = n = 0. Now suppose that (.3 holds for all m,n with m + n = N. Let m + n = N. Then we already proved (.3 if m = 0 or n = 0, so we may assume that m, n > 0. Substitute the recurrence relation n + k n + k n + k = + k k k for binomial coefficients into (.2. Then m n + k m n + k p m,n (x = ( x n+ x k + ( x n+ x k k k k= m n + l = x( x n+ x l + ( xp m,n (x l l=0 = xp m,n (x + ( xp m,n (x. (5. Hence p n,m ( x = xp n,m ( x + ( xp n,m ( x. (5.2 6

7 Adding (5. and (5.2 gives p m,n (x + p n,m ( x = x ( p m,n (x + p n,m ( x + ( x ( p m,n (x + p n,m ( x = x + ( x = by induction. This completes the proof of (.3. 6 A proof by generating functions The following proof was kindly communicated to us by Helmut Prodinger. Fix x (0,. For u,v (0, let f(u,v;x := m n + k u m v n ( x n+ x k. (6. k Then From (6. we have m,n 0 f(v,u; x = f(u,v;x = u m,n 0 = u = m + k u m v n x m+ ( x k. (6.2 k n 0v n ( x n+ k 0 n 0 x ( u( ux = x u ( n + k v n ( x n+ ( ux n+ v( x ux ux v( x. k (ux k Hence and f(u,v;x + f(v,u; x = f(v,u; x = x v ux v( x ( x ux v( x u + x = v ( u( v. So f(u,v;x + f(v,u; x = u m v n, m,n 0 and combined with (6., (6.2 this yields (. by taking the coefficient of u m v n. 7

8 7 A proof using the beta integral By the evaluation of the beta integral (see [,.] we have = = = (m + n +! m!n! (m + n +! m!n! (m + n +! m!n! 0 x 0 x 0 t m ( t n dt t m ( t n dt + t m ( t n dt + (m + n +! m!n! (m + n +! m!n! x x Now compare (. with (7.. We will settle (. by proving that (m + n +! m!n! x 0 t m ( t n dt = x m+ 0 t m ( t n dt t n ( t m dt. (7. ( x k. (7.2 The integral on the left-hand side of (7.2 is an incomplete beta function, which can be expressed as hypergeometric function (see [6, 2.5.3, p.87]. For completeness we give the derivation, by binomial expansion of ( t n : B x (m +,n + := Here x 0 = m + xm+ n,b 2F ;x := c t m ( t n dt = ( n k (m + 2 k ( n k (b k (c k ( n k x t m+k dt = x m+ ( n k x k 0 m + k + x k = n,m + m + xm+ 2F ;x. (7.3 m + 2 x k (n = 0,,2,..., c 0,,..., n + is the terminating Gauß hypergeometric series. On the other hand, the right-hand side of (7.2 can be written in terms of the same hypergeometric function: x m+ n,m + ( x k = x m+ 2F ; x n = (m + n +! (m +!n! where we used the limit case for c n of Pfaff s identity n,b 2F ; x = (c b ( n n,b 2F c (c n b c n + ;x ( n,m + x m+ 2F ;x m + 2 see [, (2.3.4]. Now (7.2 follows by substitution of (7.3 and (7.4. 8, (7.4 (n nonnegative integer, (7.5

9 8 A proof using hypergeometric series Compare the binomial series ( x n = (n + k with (.4. Then we see that identity (.4 is equivalent with the identity k=m+ (n + k x k = x m+ x k ( x < (8. ( x k n ( x <. (8.2 In terms of hypergeometric series, (8.2 can be rewritten as (m + n +! n + m + 2, n,m + x m+ ( x n+ 2F ;x = x m+ 2F ; x. (8.3 (m +!n! m + 2 n So we have to prove (8.3. But this follows by combining (7.4 with Euler s transformation formula [, (2.2.7] for our choice of parameters: n + m + 2, n,m + 2F ;x = ( x n 2F ;x. (8.4 m + 2 m + 2 Remark 8.. We can write (.4 as where u (x := m u 2 (x := x m+ = u 3 = u + u 2, (8.5 (n + k m,n + x k = 2 F m ;x, (8.6 (m + n +! (m +!n! n,m + ( x k n = x m+ ( x n 2F ; x n, (8.7. (8.8 ( m +, n x m+ ( x n 2F ;x m + 2 ( 0, m n u 3 (x := ( x n = ( x n 2F ; x n Here the third identity in (8.7 is (7.4. Now u, u 2 and u 3 are three different solutions of the hypergeometric differential equation x( xu (x ( (n + 2x + m( x u (x + m(n + u(x = 0. (8.9 9

10 Indeed, consider Kummer s 24 solutions of the hypergeometric equation z( zu (z + ( c (a + b + z u (z abu(z = 0 (8.0 in [6, 2.9] with (a,b,c := ( m,n +, m. Then u,u 2,u 3 above (u 2 up to a constant factor are equal to (, (7, (2, respectively, in [6, 2.9]. However, this is for u and u 3 only a formal proof, because there occurs a lower parameter in the hypergeometric function which is a nonpositive integer. For a rigorous argument for u, consider the solution [6, 2.9(] of (8.0 first for (a,b,c := ( m,n +,c and then let c m. Also, for u 3, consider the solution [6, 2.9(2] of (8.0 first for c,a := b m n with b general, and then let b n +. For the general theory of solving the hypergeometric differential equation (8.0 see [, 2.3]. In general, for fixed a,b,c, and on a simply connected domain in C which avoids the singular points 0, (and, one can choose two linearly independent solutions and have the general solution as an arbitrary linear combination of these two solutions. For a particular solution the coefficients in the linear combination can be found from (possibly asymptotic values of the solution at two of the three singular points. In our case of solutions u, u 2, u 3, given by (8.6 (8.8, the solutions are rational, so they exist as one-valued functions on C (possibly with a pole in. If we would a priori know only that u 3 (x = Au (x+bu 2 (x then we can compute A = by putting x = 0 and we can compute B = by multiplying both sides of the equality by ( x n+, next putting x =, and then using the Chu-Vandermonde identity [, Corollary 2.2.3] for the evaluation of 2 F (m +, n;m + 2;. The case discussed here is the case m = 0 in Vidūnas [0, 8] (trivial monodromy group. In this way he obtained (.4 as the case m = 0 of the identity at the end of his section 8. 9 A more general three-term hypergeometric identity For α > 0 and n,m nonnegative integers we will prove the following three-term identity: m +, α ( z n ( z α 2F n + m + 2 ;z = (n + m+ n,m + z m+ ( z n ( z α 2F (n + α + m+ n α ; z + (m + n+ m,n + (z 2F (m + α + n+ m α ;z C\[0,]. (9. This formula makes good sense on the indicated domain, since 2 F (a,b;c;z, originally defined as a power series for z <, has a unique analytic continuation to C\[,. Hence, the 2 F on the left is uniquely defined for z / [0,]. Also, ( z α is uniquely defined for z / [0,]. The two 2 F s on the right, being polynomials, are defined for all z C. If one wishes, one may rewrite ( z n ( z α as ( n+ z n ( z α n. For α 0 the identity (9. tends to the identity (.4. In fact, (9., which is of the form u 3 = u + u 2 (see (8.5, has the terms u, u 2 and u 3 as solutions of the differential equation z( zu (z ( (n + 2z + m( z + α u (z + m(n + u(z = 0, (9.2 0

11 i.e., the hypergeometric differential equation (8.0 for (a, b, c = ( m, n +, m α. Indeed, see the solutions [6, 2.9 (8,(,(4] of (9.2. This gives u (after substituting (7.5, u 2 and u 3, respectively. For α 0, (9.2 tends to (8.9, and the solutions u,u 2,u 3 of (9.2 tend to the solutions u,u 2,u 3 of (8.9. The case of (9. that α is a nonnegative integer is essentially the general case of the identity at the end of section 8 in Vidūnas [0]. Just transform the 2 F on the left of (9. by first reversing the order of summation in the hypergeometric series and next applying Pfaff s transformation formula (2.9. For the proof of (9., start with the three-term identity m +, α 2F n + m + 2 ;z Γ(n + m + 2Γ(n + α + m +, n = Γ(n + Γ(n + m + α + 2 z m 2F ; z n α Γ(n + m + 2Γ( n α n +, m + z n ( z n++α 2F ; z Γ(m + Γ( α n + α + 2 z / {0} [,, (9.3 see [6, 2.0(4] (or [, (2.3.] combined with (2.9. Note that we don t have to exclude z (,0 in (9.3 because the two 2 F s on the right are terminating. By (7.5 the last hypergeometric function on the right can be replaced by (α + m (n + α + 2 m 2F ( n +, m m α ;z In the identity which thus results from (9.3, first replace z by z and next multiply both sides by ( z n ( z α. This yields (9.. 0 A multivariable generalization The proof of (. in section 6 by generating functions can be generalized such that a multivariable analogue of (. is obtained. Let s := x + + x n. Define f a,...,a n (x,...,x n := x an+ n a k =0... a n k n =0 (a n + k + +k n k!... k n!. x k...xk n n sa + +a n (k + +k n. (0. Lemma 0.. Fix x,...,x n [0, such that s [0,]. Then for w,...,w n [0,] we have a,...,a n 0 w a...wan n f a,...,a n (x,...,x n = x n w n x n s (w x + + w n x n n j= w j s. (0.2

12 Proof By substitution of (0. in the left-hand side of (0.2 and by interchange of summations we see that the left-hand side of (0.2 equals x n k,...,k n,a n 0 n = x n j= n = x n j= n = x n = Hence j= w j s w j s w j s (w s a... (w n s (a an n + k+ +kn k!...k n! a k,...,a n k n k,...,k n,a n 0 k,a n 0 a n 0 x n (w x + + w n x n (a n + k (x /s k...(x n /s k n (w n x n an (a n + k + +k n k!... k n! (w x k...(w n x n k n (w n x n an (w x + w n x n k (w n x n an (w n x n an ( (w x + + w n x n an+ n j= w j s = x n w n x n s (w x + + w n x n Let σ be a cyclic permutation of,2,...,n. Then w a...wan n f a σ(,...,a σ(n (x σ(,...,x σ(n a,...,a n 0 a,...,a n 0 = a,...,a n 0 = a,...,a n 0 n j= w j s. w a σ (...w a σ (n n f a,...,a n (x σ(,...,x σ(n w a σ(...wan σ(n f a,...,a n (x σ(,...,x σ(n = x σ(n w σ(n x σ(n s (w x + + w n x n w a...wan n = σ n j= w j s. f aσ(,...,a σ(n (x σ(,...,x σ(n σ x σ(n w σ(n x σ(n s (w x + + w n x n = s s(w x + + w n x n (w x + + w n x n = s n j= w j s = a,...,a n 0 n j= n j= w j s w j s w a...wan n s a + +a n+. 2

13 Here summation over σ means summation over all cyclic permutations σ of,2,...,n. By comparing coefficients of w a... wan n we conclude: Theorem 0.2. Let f a,...,a n (x,...,x n be defined by (0.. Then (x + + x n a + +a n+ = σ f aσ(,...,a σ(n (x σ(,...,x σ(n. (0.3 Here summation is over all cyclic permutations σ of,2,...,n. For x + + x n = identity (0.3 simplifies to = f aσ(,...,a σ(n (x σ(,...,x σ(n (0.4 σ with f a,...,a n (x,...,x n = x an+ n a k =0... a n k n =0 (a n + k + +k n k!... k n! x k...xk n n. (0.5 Remark 0.3. For n = 2 we can write (0.4, (0.5 as = f m,n (x, x + f n,m ( x,x with f m,n (x, x = ( x n+ m (n + k So we have (.. The case n = 3 of (0.4, (0.5 is also noteworthy as a two-variable analogue of (.: = f a,b,c (x,y, x y + f b,c,a (y, x y,x + f c,a,b ( x y,x,y, (0.6 a b f a,b,c (x,y, x y = ( x y c+ (c + k+l x k y l. l! (0.7 l=0 If we divide both sides of (0.6 by ( x y c+ then the resulting identity has the form ( x y c = f(x,y + x a+ g(x,y + y b+ h(x,y, where f(x,y is the polynomial consisting of all terms of the power series of ( x y c which have degree a in x and degree b in y, while g(x,y and h(x,y are power series in x and y. There does not seem to be an a priori symmetry argument which settles (0.6 from this observation. For instance, if we try to imitate the proof for n = 2 in section 2 then we have to consider the homogeneous version of (0.6 given by (0.3 for n = 3: (x + y + z a+b+c+ = f a,b,c (x,y,z + f b,c,a (y,z,x + f c,a,b (z,x,y. The problem is where to put on the right the terms γ k,l,m x k y l z m (k + l + m = a + b + c + in the expansion of (x + y + z a+b+c+. Certainly, we can uniquely put all terms γ k,l,m x k y l z m with k a, l b in f a,b,c (x,y,z, all terms with l b, m c in f b,c,a (y,z,x, and all terms with m c, k a in f c,a,b (z,x,y, but there is no clear rule where to put a term in which only one of the three inequalities k a, l b, m c holds. x k. 3

14 Remark 0.4. Note that we can formally express the right-hand side of (0.7 in terms of Appell s hypergeometric function F 2 (see [6, 5.7.]: f a,b,c (x,y, x y = ( x y c+ F 2 (c +, a, b, a, b,x,y. However, due to the nonpositive integer bottom parameters we cannot transform this F 2 function by [6, 5.(8] similarly as we transformed the 2 F function in Remark 2.. Similarly to the case n = 3, the multisum on the right-hand side of (0.5 can be formally written as a Lauricella hypergeometric function F A (see [2, Ch. VII] or [9, (8.6.]: f a,...,a n (x,...,x n = x an+ n F (n A (a n +, a,..., a n, a,..., a n ;x,...,x n (x + + x n =. (0.8 Here the F (n A has to be interpreted as lim F (n A (a n +, a,..., a n,b,...,b n ;x,...,x n. (0.9 (b,...,b n ( a,..., a n A PDE associated with the multivariable identity From the expression in (0.8 of f a,...,a n (x,...,x n, x x n in terms of a Lauricella hypergeometric function, we will derive a PDE for f a,...,a n. Consider first the system of PDE s for the F (n A in (0.9, as given in [2, Ch. VII, XXXIX] (for n = 3 we have Appell s hypergeometric function F 2 and then the system of PDE s is also given in [6, 5.9(0]. After taking the limit for (b,...,b n ( a,..., a n we obtain that u(x,...,x n := F (n A (a n +, a,..., a n, a,..., a n ;x,...,x n (. satisfies the system of PDE s x i ( x i i 2 u x i x j j i u (a i + (a n + 2x i i u + a i x j j u + (a n + a i u = 0 j i Here i denotes / x i. The sum of the n PDE s equals x i ( x i i 2 u x i x j i j u + (a + + a n a n 2 i i j i j x i i u i (i =,...,n. a i i u + (a n + (a + + a n u = 0. (.2 Proposition.. The function (. is the unique solution, up to a constant factor, of (.2 which has the form u(x,...,x n = a k =0... a n k n =0 γ k,...,k n x k...xk n n. (.3 4

15 Proof Computation of the left-hand side of (.2 with u := x k...xk n n yields ( (a k + + (a n k n (a n + + k + + k n x k...xk n n + ( n i= k i (k i a i x i It follows that u of the form (.3 satisfies (.2 iff ( (a k + + (a n k n (a n + + k + + k n γ k,...,k n n + x k...xk n n. (k i + (k i a i γ k,...,k i +,...,k n = 0. (.4 i= Give some value to γ a,...,a n. Then we see from (.4 by downward induction with respect to k + + k n that all coefficients γ k,...,k n with 0 k i a i (i =,...,n are uniquely determined by this initial value. In passing we see that (.4 is satisfied by γ k,...,k n := (a n + k + +k n k!...k n! Thus we have also proved from scratch that u given by (. satisfies (.2. By some computation, we see that satisfies the PDE n v(x,...,x n := ( x x n an+ u(x,...,x n i= x i ( x i 2 i v 2 i<j = f a,...,a n (x,...,x n, x x n. n x i x j i j v + ((a + + a n x i a i i v = 0. (.5 i= Clearly, the function v := satisfies (.5. Furthermore, by straightforward computations we see: If v satisfies (.5 then the function (x,...,x n v( x x n,x 2,...,x n satisfies (.5 with a and a n interchanged. Thus we have proved: Theorem.2. For all permutations σ of, 2,..., n the functions (x,...,x n f aσ(,...,a σ(n (x σ(,...,x σ(n (x + + x n = are solutions of (.5. Up to a constant factor they are the unique solutions of (.5 of the form v(x,...,x n = x a σ(n+ σ(n a σ( k =0... a σ(n k n =0 γ k,...,k n x k σ(...xk n σ(n (x + +x n =. 5

16 Now consider a solution v(x,...,x n of (.5, let x n be a variable independent of x,...,x n, and let φ be an arbitrary function of that new variable. Then trivially (.5 holds with v replaced by φ(x n v(x,...,x n. Now pass in this PDE to new variables y,...,y n by or equivalently, x = y y + + y n,..., x n = y n y + + y n, x n = y + + y n, y = x x n,..., y n = x n x n, y n = ( x x n x n. Then we obtain that the function w(y,...,y n := φ(y + + y n v ( y satisfies the PDE y + +y n,..., y n y + +y n ( y i (y + +y n y i i 2 w 2 y i y j i j w+ (a + +a n y i a i (y + +y n i w = 0, i= i<j i= (.6 where i denotes / y i. Thus by (0., (0.5 and Theorem.2 we have proved in particular: Theorem.3. The function w(y,...,y n := f a,...,a n (y,...,y n, defined by (0., satisfies (.6. Similarly, the functions w(y,...,y n := f aσ(,...,a σ(n (y σ(,...,y σ(n satisfy (.6, where σ is a permutation of,...,n. Also, the function w(y,...,y n := (y + +y n a + +a n+ satisfies (.6. References [] G. E. Andrews, R. Askey and R. Roy, Special functions, Cambridge University Press, 999. [2] P. Appell and M. J. Kampé de Fériet, Fonctions hypergéométriques et hypersphériques: Polynômes d Hermite, Gauthier-Villars, 926. [3] T. W. Chaundy and J. E. Bullard, John Smith s problem, Math. Gazette 44 (960, [4] I. Daubechies, Orthonormal bases of compactly supported wavelets, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 4 (988, [5] I. Daubechies, Ten lectures on wavelets, Regional Conference Series in Applied Math. 6, SIAM, 992. [6] A. Erdélyi, Higher transcendental functions, Vol., McGraw-Hill, 953. [7] O. Herrmann, On the approximation problem in nonrecursive digital filter design, IEEE Trans. Circuit Theory 8 (97, [8] P. de Jong, The arrangement of the arithmetical triangle, preprint, 2008, to appear. 6

17 [9] L. J. Slater, Generalized hypergeometric functions, Cambridge University Press, 966. [0] R. Vidūnas, Degenerate Gauss hypergeometric functions, Kyushu J. Math. 6 (2007, 09 35; arxiv:math/ v [math.ca]. T. H. Koornwinder, Korteweg-de Vries Institute, University of Amsterdam, Plantage Muidergracht 24, 08 TV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; thk@science.uva.nl M. J. Schlosser, Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Wien, Nordbergstrasse 5, A-090 Vienna, Austria; michael.schlosser@univie.ac.at 7