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.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Of course, I can use Stirling's approximation, but for me it is quite interesting, that, if we define $k = (n-1)!$, then the left function will be $(nk)!$, and the right one will be $k! k^{n!}$. I don't think that it is a coincidence. It seems, that there should be smarter solution for this, other than Stirling's approximation.

share|cite|improve this question
You don't think "what" is a coincidence? – Graphth Oct 9 '12 at 14:09
I cannot explicitely explain why did I say so. Probably, I just wanted to point that it seems that there should be smarter solution others than Stirling's approximation. But, of course, I can be wrong. – Kos Oct 9 '12 at 14:22

For $(nk)!$ your factors are $1,2,3,\dots, k$ then $k+1, \dots, 2k,2k+1 \dots, k!$.

For $k! k^{n!}$ your factors are $1,2,3,\dots, k$ but then constant $k,\dots,k$.

So every factor of (nk)! is > or = to each factor of k!k^(n!)

share|cite|improve this answer
You can use \geq for $\geq$ – The Chaz 2.0 Oct 9 '12 at 17:05
But total numher of factors in the first function is $n!$, while in the second it is $k+n!$, so it has extra $k$ factors, each equals to $k$ – Kos Oct 10 '12 at 7:24

Take $\log$ on both sides and use the $\log {n!} = \Theta(n\log n)$. The first terms becomes $\Theta(n!\log{(n!)})$, the second one becomes $\Theta((n-1)!\log {(n-1)!}) + \Theta(n!\log{(n-1)!})$. So it's obvious that the first terms grows faster than the second one.

share|cite|improve this answer
It might be useful to expand on this answer a little bit. In particular, it's not immediately clear to me why there's an asymptotic gap between $n! log(n!)$ and $n! \log((n-1)!)$. – Micah Sep 5 '13 at 21:05
$n!\log(n!) - n!\log{(n-1)!} = n!(\log{n!} - \log{(n-1)!}) = n!(\log{n})$ – platinor Sep 6 '13 at 21:10
That looks an awful lot like a proof that $n! log(n!)$ is $\Theta(n!(\log(n-1)!))$ to me (since $n! \log n$ grows more slowly than either of the other two terms). It looks to me like you need sharper asymptotics than $\Theta$-notation gives you, which leads back towards Stirling's approximation... – Micah Sep 6 '13 at 21:26

Your Answer


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.