I know others have already posted about this recurrence $T(n) = 2T(n/2) + n\lg n$ on the following these two posts: post1 and post2
However, the style in which they have solved them, is not one with which I am ery familiar. I was hoping someone could look at my work so far, and then point me in the right direction or show me what I am doing wrong. This is my work up to this point:
$$T(n) = 2T(n/2) + n\lg n$$ $$=2[2T(n/2^2) + (n/2)\lg (n/2)] + n\lg n$$ $$=2^2T(n/2^2) + n\lg(n/2)+n\lg n$$
I expanded this recurrence out a bit further and finally found the general formula:
$$2^kT(n/2^k)+n\sum_{i=0}^klg(n)-lg(2^i)$$
I understand what to set $k$ equal to in order to arrive at $T(1)$, but I honestly don't understand how to simplify the summation in this problem. Should I keep the logarithm (which is base 2 by the way) in the following format $\lg(n/2^i)$ and split the summation, or is there another way to simplify this summation? I am stuck.
EDIT
So, I made some errors in my formular when I orignally posted this. Looking at the general formula above involving $k$ now, I am still wondering how to simplify and solve it. I am not sure what to do with the $\sum_{i=0}^klg(n)$. For the $lg(2^i)$ term I am thinking I can just pull the $i$ down and pull the $lg(2) outside of the summation.
I agree (now) with your first three iterates, including the cancellation of the extra 2's I initially missed in my comments. I'd like for simplicity to state the general pattern I noticed in terms of beginning with $2^{k+1}T(1/2^{k+1}).$ I get $$T(n)=2^{k+1}T(1/2^{k+1})+n\ [ \lg (n)+\lg (n/2)+\lg(n/4)+ \cdots + \lg(n/2^{k}).] \tag{1}$$ The log terms inside the square brackets may be combined into a single log by using the sum of logs equal to the log of the product. For the product we have a numerator of $n^k$ since there are $k$ terms each with numerator $n$. The product of denominators is $2^0 \cdot 2^1 \cdots 2^k=2^{0+1+\cdots+k}=2^{k(k+1)/2}.$ So the sum of logs inside square brackets in $(1)$ is the single log $$\lg \frac{n^k}{2^{k(k+1)/2}}.$$ Of course since it is log base 2 one may go one more step to $k \lg n -[k(k+1)/2]$ but I don't see much advantage in that.