Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I've given myself this question but I can't see how to get it. I'm actually not taking calculus I'm in high school taking Algebra 2 but I've learned a bit or two from this site.

I did:

$x! = 10$

Trying to solve for $x$ but I had trouble doing so. Can anyone give me a hand here?

share|improve this question
6  
There is no integer $x$ whose factorial is $10$. Indeed, since factorials form a strictly increasing sequence and $4!=24$, if 10 were a factorial it would be one of $1!$, $2!$ or $3!$. But it isn't. –  Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Apr 2 '12 at 23:31
3  
However, one can extend the factorial function to a function of arbitrary reals (or even complex numbers) using the gamma function. There won't be a closed solution to this though (or I'll eat my shoe). –  anon Apr 2 '12 at 23:32
2  
@anon, the chances of that being the answer being sought are vanishingly small, don't you think? –  Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Apr 2 '12 at 23:33
1  
I suspect the question is $10!$, which is not a very difficult mental arithmetic exercise –  Henry Apr 2 '12 at 23:44
2  
@anon routine calculations show that $z = \frac{9 \pi^2 + 8 \pi - 45}{5 \pi}$ satisfies $\Gamma(z) = 10$. Bon appetit! –  guy Apr 3 '12 at 1:07

4 Answers 4

up vote 1 down vote accepted

Wolfram alpha gives the roots of $\Gamma(x+1)=10$ as $-4.995806, -4.016334, -2.947296, -2.097191, -1.095325, 3.390078.$

One root of $\Gamma(y)=x$ is approximated by $\frac{L(x)}{W(\frac{L(x)}e)}+\frac{1}2$ where $L(x)=\ln(\frac{x+c}{\sqrt{2\pi}})$, $c\approx0.036534$ and $W(x)$ is the principal branch of the inverse of $xe^x$. $W(x)$ can be approximated by selecting an intial $w_0$, and find succesive approximations $w_{j+1}=w_j-\frac{w_je^{w_j}-z}{e^{w_j}+w_je^{w_j}}$. $e^x$ and $\ln {1+x}$ can be found using $1+x+ \frac{x^2}/{2!}+\frac{x^3}{3!}...$ and $x-\frac{x^2}2+\frac{x^3}3-\frac{x^4}4+...$ respectively. This can be done by hand but is tedious. http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=342551&tstart=0

EDIT: The expansion for $\ln(x+1)$ only works if $|x|<1$. Otherwise use $\ln x\approx \frac{\pi}{2M(1,\frac{4}s}-m\ln 2$ with $M(1,\frac{4}s)=$ thearithmetic geometric mean of $1$ and $\frac{4}s$ ,$s=x2^m$ and $m$ any chosen integer (larger $m$ give a closer approximation).

share|improve this answer

If you want to get a good numerical answer, get a calculator (such as the better HP calculators) that have both the Gamma function and a numeric solver.

share|improve this answer

If one function doesn't work, you can always create a new one that does.

Choose a small number, say $d$ ($0\lt d \lt 1$), and define a factorial-like function $$F(k)=d(d+1)(d+2)\dots(k+d-1)(k+d).$$

After a bit of trial and error, if we take $d=\frac{16}{25} = 0.64$, we find that $F(3) = 0.64 \times 1.64 \times 2.64 \times 3.64 = 10.086$
to five significant digits, which is fairly close to 10. Other values of $d$ may get even closer.
It's not quite factorial, but is in the spirit of factorial.

share|improve this answer

If you allow for approximate solutions, in other words, you interpret "=" as meaning "approximately equal to", then you might consider 3 as a solution, since 3!=6, and 4!=24.

share|improve this answer
    
Then how about 4!! –  The Chaz 2.0 Apr 3 '12 at 1:07
    
@TheChaz 4 might work also (but I don't see how 4!! will work). Do you want only an over-approximation, with an over-approximation satisfying (10-x)<0? Or do you want only an under-approximation with an under-approximation satisfying (10-x)>0? Do you want both over and under approximations? Which sort of metric do you think best suited here for determining how close a positive integer lies to n where n!=10 in say this graph en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Factorial_interpolation.png? –  Doug Spoonwood Apr 3 '12 at 1:50
    
Oh I don't know. I was thinking of asking you the same question about metrics. Whatever you decide on, it should be that d(4!!, 10) = d(8, 10) < d(3!, 10), d(4!, 10) :) –  The Chaz 2.0 Apr 3 '12 at 1:56

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.