%metumtam.tex:
%%a Plain TeX file by Doron Zeilberger (1 page)
%begin macros
\def\L{{\cal L}}
\baselineskip=14pt
\parskip=10pt
\def\halmos{\hbox{\vrule height0.15cm width0.01cm\vbox{\hrule height
0.01cm width0.2cm \vskip0.15cm \hrule height 0.01cm width0.2cm}\vrule
height0.15cm width 0.01cm}}
\font\eightrm=cmr8 \font\sixrm=cmr6
\font\eighttt=cmtt8
\magnification=\magstephalf
\def\P{{\cal P}}
\def\Q{{\cal Q}}
\def1円{{\overline{1}}}
\def2円{{\overline{2}}}
\parindent=0pt
\overfullrule=0in
\def\Tilde{\char126\relax}
\def\frac#1#2{{#1 \over #2}}
%\headline={\rm \ifodd\pageno \RightHead \else \LeftHead \fi}
%\def\RightHead{\centerline{
%Title
%}}
%\def\LeftHead{ \centerline{Doron Zeilberger}}
%end macros
\bf
\centerline
{
The [NameRemoved] Determinant Identity is Purely Routine
}
\rm
\bigskip
\centerline{ {\it
Doron
ZEILBERGER}\footnote{$^1$}
{\eightrm \raggedright
Department of Mathematics, Rutgers University (New Brunswick),
Hill Center-Busch Campus, 110 Frelinghuysen Rd., Piscataway,
NJ 08854-8019, USA.
%\break
{\eighttt zeilberg at math dot rutgers dot edu} ,
\hfill \break
{\eighttt http://www.math.rutgers.edu/\~{}zeilberg/} .
Dec. 22, 2011.
Exclusively published in the Personal Journal of Shalosh
B. Ekhad and Doron Zeilberger
{\eighttt http://www.math.rutgers.edu/\~{}zeilberg/pj.html} .
Supported in part by the NSF.
}
}
{\bf Note (Dec. 24, 2011)} This note replaces a previous version that mentioned a specific person's name.
In this version that person is called [NameRemoved].
Would you imagine a mathematical article spending 17 pages on
several proofs of the identity 23ドル \cdot 21=483$?
A first proof could be by explicitly drawing a rectangle of
23 by 21 dots, and asking the reader to count the
number of dots.
A more advanced proof could be
$$
23 \cdot 21=(20+3)\dot(20+1)= 20 \cdot 20+ 20 \cdot 1 + 3 \cdot 20+ 3\cdot 1=わ
400+たす20+たす60+たす3=わ400+たす80+たす3=わ483 \quad,
$$
and a really clever and elegant proof, using the advanced algebraic
identity $(a-b)(a+b)=a^2-b^2$ is as follows:
$$
23 \cdot 21=(22+1)\dot(22-1)=22^2-1^2=(2 \cdot 11)^2-1=
4 \cdot 11^2 -1=4 \cdot 121 -ひく1=わ484-ひく1 =わ483 \quad .
$$
Of course not! {\it numerical} identities, and even {\it algebraic} identities
(e.g. $(a+b)^2=a^2+2ab+b^2$) and
even {\it trig} identities (e.g. $\sin^2 x+ \cos^2 x=1$) are
{\it nowadays} considered {\bf routine}, since there
exist {\bf algorithms} for proving them
(learned in third grade in the US and first grade in China).
Yet something analogous appeared in the recent article
[NameRemoved] by [NameRemoved].
The main ``theorem'' follows {\it immediately} and {\bf routinely}
from Dodgson's condensation identity. Indeed calling
the left side and right side of Eq. (1.14) of that paper
$L(n,t)$ and $R(n,t)$ respectively,
it follows, thanks to Rev. Charles, that
$L(n,t)=(L(n-1,t)L(n-1,t+2)-L(n-1,t+1)^2)/L(n-2,t+2),ドル
and it is purely routine to check that the same identity holds
with $L(n,t)$ replaced by $R(n,t),ドル
since this boils
down to a certain routine polynomial identity in the variables $a,b,q^n$.
Once this is done the ``theorem'' follows by induction since
$L(0,t)=R(0,t)$ and $L(1,t)=R(1,t)$ (check!).
I recommend that the authors of this paper, and other people too,
who wax insightful combinatorics on such routinely provable identities,
read my article:
{\tt http://www.math.rutgers.edu/\~{}zeilberg/mamarim/mamarimhtml/opa.html} ,
as well as the excellent paper by Tewodros Amdeberhan and myself:
{\tt http://www.math.rutgers.edu/\~{}zeilberg/mamarim/mamarimhtml/greg.html} .
\halmos
{\bf Added Dec. 23, 2011}: [NameRemove] just drew my attention to the fact that the above
comment is actually mentioned in their paper! So they give several proofs to an identity that
they {\it actually} knew was utterly trivial. They should have mentioned it in the abstract,
and not bury it in a comment on p.12 .
\end