I know the answer to this problem, the answer is the series diverges because the bottom factor increases at a rate faster then the top factor for large values of n.
My question is, HOW DO I PROVE THAT THE NUMERATOR INCREASES AT A FASTER RATE THAN THE DENOMINATOR AT LARGE VALUES OF N.
Sorry to put my question in all caps, but the majority of the time I post stuff on here, people seem to always misread my questions and give me off the wall answers.
My question is, HOW DO I PROVE THAT THE NUMERATOR INCREASES AT A FASTER RATE THAN THE DENOMINATOR AT LARGE VALUES OF N.
Sorry to put my question in all caps, but the majority of the time I post stuff on here, people seem to always misread my questions and give me off the wall answers.
-
Stirling's formula: n! ~ (n/e)^n sqrt(2pi n)
This gives you a good estimate of n! & indicates the rate of increase.
Look this up in Wikipedia. Or google "Stirling's formula".
Or "gamma function", Euler's generalization of n! to all real numbers.
---
Simpler but much less accurate: N(n) = n!, N(n+1) = (n+1) N(n); N(n+1) - N(n) = n N(n)
This is like the differential equation dN(t)/dt = t N(t)
D(n) = 2^n = e^(an), where a = ln(2)
Obviously define D(t) = 2^t = e((at)
d/dt D(t) = a D(t)
In ist case rate of increase = tN(t); 2nd case rate of increase = a D(t)
t increases while 2 is constant.
This gives you a good estimate of n! & indicates the rate of increase.
Look this up in Wikipedia. Or google "Stirling's formula".
Or "gamma function", Euler's generalization of n! to all real numbers.
---
Simpler but much less accurate: N(n) = n!, N(n+1) = (n+1) N(n); N(n+1) - N(n) = n N(n)
This is like the differential equation dN(t)/dt = t N(t)
D(n) = 2^n = e^(an), where a = ln(2)
Obviously define D(t) = 2^t = e((at)
d/dt D(t) = a D(t)
In ist case rate of increase = tN(t); 2nd case rate of increase = a D(t)
t increases while 2 is constant.
-
This is a textbook example of a situation where you'd use the ratio test:
Start by taking the limit as n->∞ of a(n+1)/a(n)
a(n+1) = (n+1)!/2^(n+1)
a(n) = n!/2^n
divide the two and you get:
ratio(n) = (n+1)/2
taking the limit as n --> infinity and you have
ratio = infinity
since the (limit of the) ratio is greater than 1, you can safely state that the series diverges.
P.S. there's a reason they don't give you a derivative of the factorial function. First off, it isn't implicitly defined to be a continuous function. Second, if you went through the trouble to find what a continuous version of the factorial would look like (see the "Gamma Function"), you find out that the derivative of the "factorial" function would be
y' = integral (from 0 to infinity) of [t^x * e^-t * lnt]dt
because sometimes math is a cruel mistress
Start by taking the limit as n->∞ of a(n+1)/a(n)
a(n+1) = (n+1)!/2^(n+1)
a(n) = n!/2^n
divide the two and you get:
ratio(n) = (n+1)/2
taking the limit as n --> infinity and you have
ratio = infinity
since the (limit of the) ratio is greater than 1, you can safely state that the series diverges.
P.S. there's a reason they don't give you a derivative of the factorial function. First off, it isn't implicitly defined to be a continuous function. Second, if you went through the trouble to find what a continuous version of the factorial would look like (see the "Gamma Function"), you find out that the derivative of the "factorial" function would be
y' = integral (from 0 to infinity) of [t^x * e^-t * lnt]dt
because sometimes math is a cruel mistress
-
i think numerator will be much greater number than denominator (as n approaches to infinity)
bottom is only 2's ( 2*2*2... 100 times, for instance)
top is, for instance, 100*99*98*97 ...
bottom is only 2's ( 2*2*2... 100 times, for instance)
top is, for instance, 100*99*98*97 ...
-
1st : use the Ratio Test for the divergence
2nd : f(n) = n! / 2^n < f(n+1) = [ n+1]! / 2^(n+1) for all n > 0
and your 1st statement is in error { see your ' question' }
2nd : f(n) = n! / 2^n < f(n+1) = [ n+1]! / 2^(n+1) for all n > 0
and your 1st statement is in error { see your ' question' }