0

Let $p$ be a prime, let $x$ be an integer not divisible by $p$, and let $j\geq 1$. Denote, as usual, by $\nu=\nu_p(j+1)$ the largest exponent such that $p^{\nu}$ divides $j+1$.

My question : is it true that $p^{\nu}$ always divides $\binom{x-1}{j}=\frac{(x-1)\ldots(x-j)}{j!}$ ?

My thoughts : I have checked that it holds for $p=2,3,5$ and $x\leq 1000$. It is also easy to check when $j$ is "small" compared to $p$ (for example when $j\lt p$, the numerator is divisible by $p$ but not the denominator, so we are done).

It is natural to use Legendre's formula here : we know that

$$ \nu_p(j!)=\sum_{t=1}^{\infty}\left \lfloor \frac{j}{p^t}\right\rfloor, \nu_p((x-1)\ldots(x-j))=\sum_{t=1}^{\infty} \left\lfloor \frac{x-1}{p^t}\right\rfloor -\left \lfloor \frac{x-(j+1)}{p^t}\right\rfloor $$

So, it would suffice to show the following inequality :

$$ \sum_{t=1}^{\infty}\left \lfloor \frac{x-1}{p^t}\right\rfloor - \left\lfloor \frac{x-(j+1)}{p^t}\right\rfloor - \left\lfloor \frac{j}{p^t}\right\rfloor \geq \nu $$

But then I'm stuck.

Ewan Delanoy
  • 61,600
  • The key divisibility has already been proved here a number of times in greater generality, e.g. see here in the dupe (the argument in T. Andrews answer is a special ($p$-local) case). – Bill Dubuque Nov 02 '21 at 18:25
  • @BillDubuque Though the two arguments are of course similar, neither is a special case of the other. I do not assume that $j+1$ and $x$ are coprime, so T. Andrew's answer is not a special case of the lemma in your link. – Ewan Delanoy Nov 02 '21 at 19:04
  • No, the argument for the prime $p$ is exactly the linked argument specialized to the localization $,\Bbb Z_p$ = subring of $\Bbb Q$ with fractions having denom's coprime to $,p.,$ This is a more structural way to concentrate on the prime $,p,$ vs. using (essentially equivalent) $\nu_p$ valuation-theoretic arguments. In particular it means that the same (order conceptual) view described there persists in this local case, i.e. a fraction writable with coprime denom's is integral. (cont'd below) – Bill Dubuque Nov 02 '21 at 19:33
  • More generally see localization - a very powerful method that is ubiquitous in number theory and algebra. – Bill Dubuque Nov 02 '21 at 19:33

2 Answers2

1

The easy proof is that:

$$x\binom{x-1}{j}=(j+1)\binom{x}{j+1}\tag1$$

So $$\nu_p(x)+\nu_p\left(\binom {x-1}j\right)\geq \nu_p(j+1).$$

But $p\not\mid x$ means $\nu_p(x)=0.$

(1) shows more generally that if $d\mid j+1$ and $\gcd(d,x)=1,$ then $d\mid \binom{x-1}{j}.$


To extend your approach using Legendre.

If $p\not \mid x$ then show for $t>0:$ $$\left\lfloor \frac{x-1}{p^t}\right\rfloor=\left\lfloor\frac{x}{p^t}\right\rfloor$$

and, for $t\leq\nu,$ $$\left\lfloor\frac{x-(j+1)}{p^t}\right\rfloor =\left\lfloor\frac{x}{p^t}\right\rfloor-\frac{j+1}{p^t}$$

So (*):

$$ \begin{align} \nu_p\left(\binom{x-1}j\right)&\geq \sum_{t=1}^{\nu}\left(\left \lfloor \frac{x-1}{p^t}\right\rfloor - \left\lfloor \frac{x-(j+1)}{p^t}\right\rfloor - \left\lfloor \frac{j}{p^t}\right\rfloor\right)\\ &=\sum_{t=1}^{\nu}\left(\frac{j+1}{p^t}-\left\lfloor\frac{j}{p^t}\right\rfloor\right) \end{align} $$

Finally, for $t\leq \nu,$ $$\left\lfloor\frac{j}{p^t}\right\rfloor =\frac{j+1}{p^t}-1.$$


Note: We get in (*) $$\sum_{t=1}^{\infty}\geq \sum_{t=1}^{\nu}$$ because all the terms in the infinite sum are non-negative, using the general inequality:

$$\lfloor \alpha+\beta\rfloor\geq \lfloor \alpha\rfloor +\lfloor\beta\rfloor.$$

Thomas Andrews
  • 177,126
1

Legendre's Formula can be written as $\nu _p(n!)=\frac{n-s_p(n)}{p-1}$, with $s_p(n)$ the sum of digits in base $p$ of $n$. On this view, you can write the inequality that you want as (this using that $\nu _p(j+1)=\nu _p((j+1)!/j!)$):
$$\frac{1+s_p(j)-s_p(j+1)}{p-1}\leq \frac{s_p(j)+s_p(x-1-j)-s_p(x-1)}{p-1},$$ which is equivalent to $$1-s_p(j+1)-s_p(x-(j+1))\leq -s_p(x-1),$$ adding both sides an $x$ and dividing over $p-1,$ using again Legendre's, one ends up on $$\frac{1}{p-1}+\nu _p(((j+1)!(x-1-j)!))\leq \frac{1}{p-1}+\nu _p((x-1)!)=\frac{1}{p-1}+\nu _p(x!),$$ which is true because $\binom{x}{j+1}$ is an integer.

Phicar
  • 14,722
  • wait, so at the end of the day this is fairly simple because $\binom{x}{j+1}=\frac{x}{j+1}\binom{x-1}{j}$ and because $p$ does not divide $x$ then the contribution of $j+1$ divides the binomial. – Phicar Nov 02 '21 at 15:50