Tell me more ×
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.

While simplifying an inequality, this inequality was derived:

$${(n+2)!}< \left(n(\sqrt{2}-1)+\sqrt{2}\right)^{n+2},\quad\quad\quad\quad n\in \mathbb{N}$$

Do you have any idea to prove it? It is very close for small $n$.

share|improve this question
1  
Please don't use display math in titles; it takes up a lot of unnecessary space on the front page. – Rahul Narain Feb 6 at 17:11
I am confused...you are asking for any hint to solve it, however you labelled your question with the "induction" tag. – Matemáticos Chibchas Feb 6 at 17:15
@MatemáticosChibchas: hint or proof with or without induction is welcome :) (However a direct proof is better) – CutieKrait Feb 6 at 17:17
4  
For zero it is false :) – uforoboa Feb 6 at 17:24
$n\in \mathbb{N}$ – CutieKrait Feb 6 at 17:25

4 Answers

up vote 1 down vote accepted

A completely different approach, that's why I don't simply edit my first (lousy) attempt:

We want to show that $$\tag1 n!<(\alpha n+\beta)^n\quad\text{for }n\ge 3,$$ where $\alpha=\sqrt 2-1\approx0.414$ and $\beta=\sqrt 2-2\alpha=2-\sqrt 2\approx0.586$. Assume we findan inequality $$ \tag2 n!\le (\gamma n)^n\quad\text{for }n\ge n_0.$$ Then we have shown $(1)$ for all $n$ with $n_0\le n\le \frac\beta{\gamma-\alpha}$ if $\gamma>\alpha$. Of course, if $(2)$ holds even for some $\gamma <\alpha$, then we have shown $(1)$ for all $n\ge n_0$. We can try to find good such $\gamma$.

By the AGM inequality, we have $$\prod_{k=r}^s k\le \left(\frac{r+s}2\right)^{s-r+1}.$$ With $r=1$ this gives us immediatyly $(2)$ with $\gamma=\frac12$, hence $(1)$ for $n\le 6$ because $\frac\beta{\frac12-\alpha}\approx6.8$.

Let $a$ be a number with $0<a<1$ such that $an$ is an integer. Then $$\tag3n!=\prod_{k=1}^{an-1}k\cdot \prod_{k=an}^nk\le \left(\frac{an}{2}\right)^{an}\left(\frac{(1+a)n}{2}\right)^{n-an}=\left(\frac n2a^a(1+a)^{1-a}\right)^n.$$ Let $\gamma=\frac{a^a(1+a)^{1-a}}2$. Numerically, if $0.19<a<0.19+\frac17$ (which can definitely be achieved if $n\ge 7$), then $\gamma<0.42$, which gives us $(1)$ for $n\le 101$ (because $\frac{\beta}{0.42-\alpha}\approx101.2$). These results alone may already be helpful for other methods that establish $(1)$ for $n$ "big enough". However, we could not possibly proceed significantly further up.

We can refine $(3)$: If $an-1\ge 7$, we have already seen that we can estimate $(an-1)!\le (0.42an)^{an}$ and obtain $$\tag4 n!\le (0.42an)^{an}\left(\frac{(1+a)n}2\right)^{n-an}=(\gamma n)^n $$ with $$\gamma = (0.42a)^a\left(\frac{1+a}2\right)^{1-a}.$$ If $0.3<a<0.6$ we find numerically that $\gamma<0.41<\alpha$. This shows $(1)$ for all $n\ge 27$ (so that $an-1\ge 7$).

In summary, $(1)$ holds for all $n\ge 3$.

Remark: Note that a bit of work is hidden in what appears above a "numerical findings": You need to show that the expressions for $\gamma$ have a unique local minimum for $a\in(0,1)$, which then allows us to conclude $\gamma(a)\le\max\{\gamma(x_1),\gamma(x_2)\}$ for all $a\in[x_1,x_2]$.

Edit: It seems like I have made an off-by-one error somewhere, but don't see where exactly right now ...

share|improve this answer

Useful bounds on $n!$ (rather than asymptotics) are given here; in this case, you can use the fact that $$ n! \le e n^{n+1/2}e^{-n} $$ for all $n\ge 1$. Taking the $n$-th root of both sides, $$ \sqrt[n]{n!} \le \left(\frac{n}{e}\right)\left(e \sqrt{n}\right)^{1/n}. $$ Now, $$ \left(e\sqrt{n}\right)^{1/n}=\exp\left({\frac{1}{n}\ln (e\sqrt{n})}\right)=\exp\left({\frac{2+\ln n}{2n}}\right) \rightarrow 1, $$ decreasing monotonically from above; in particular it's less than $9/8$ for $n\ge 22$ (by a direct calculation).

You want to show that $$ \sqrt[n]{n!}<(\sqrt{2}-1)(n-2)+\sqrt{2}=(\sqrt{2}-1)n+(2-\sqrt{2}) $$ for all $n\ge 3$. The above calculation shows the stronger inequality $$ \sqrt[n]{n!}<\frac{9}{8e}n<(\sqrt{2}-1)n$$ for $n \ge 22$. The remaining cases, $n=3,4,\ldots,21,$ can then be shown by hand to satisfy the original inequality. As you point out, for $n=3$ and $n=4$ it is close (and of course for $n=1$ and $n=2$ you have equality).

share|improve this answer
thanks. still a lot of calculations for n=3,...,21 is needed! but mathematically logical. – CutieKrait Feb 6 at 19:10

Using Stirling, $$n!\approx n^ne^{-n}\sqrt {2\pi n}$$ we can approximate the left hand side with $$ (n+2)!\approx (n+2)^{n+2}e^{-n-2}\sqrt{2\pi (n+2)}$$ and the right hand side with $$ (n(\sqrt 2-1)+\sqrt2)^{n+2}>n^{n+2}(\sqrt2-1)^{n+2}=(n+2)^{n+2}\left(1+\frac2n\right)^{-(n+2)}(\sqrt2-1)^{n+2}.$$ If we drop the common factor $(n+2)^{n+2}$ and note that $\left(1+\frac2n\right)^{-(n+2)}=\left(1-\frac2{n+1}\right)^{n+2}\to e^{-2}$, we need only compare the growth of $\sqrt{2\pi (n+2)}$ and $((\sqrt 2-1)e)^{n+2}$ . Since $(\sqrt 2-1)e>1$, the exponential "wins" for $n$ big enough. To turn this into a proper proof, you need to take a precise look at the error hidden in the "$\approx$" of Stirling and tthus determine, what "$n$ big enough" means. It turns out that the relative error is below $\frac 1{12n}$ and therefore $n=22$ can be taken as "big enough".

EDIT: Thanks to CutieKrait's comment, I noted that I had $(1+\frac2n)^{n+2}$ instead of its reciprocal. Thus one needs to have a closer look at its value as well (it's simply no longer "$>1$", but at least bounded from below ...)

share|improve this answer
why $$n^{n+2}(\sqrt2-1)^{n+2}=(n+2)^{n+2}\left(1+\frac2n\right)^{n+2}(\sqrt2-1)^{n+2‌​}$$? And you used a few approximations. finding a large enough $n$ and proving for other $n$s may be harder. – CutieKrait Feb 6 at 17:58
It's funny that my approach also hit on $n=22$ as a cutoff... a coincidence, I think, but I'm not sure. – mjqxxxx Feb 6 at 18:53

Let $$a_k=\sqrt[k] {k!}$$ By Prove elementarily that $\sqrt[n+1] {(n+1)!} - \sqrt[n] {n!}$ is strictly decreasing we have $$a_{k+2}-a_{k+1}< a_{k+1}-a_k$$ taking sum we get this inequality: $$\sum_{k=1}^{m}{a_{k+2}-a_{k+1}}< \sum_{k=1}^{m}{a_{k+1}-a_k}$$ that is $$a_{m+2}-a_{2}< a_{m+1}-a_1$$ that is $$a_{m+2}-a_{m+1}< a_{2}-a_1=\sqrt{2}-1$$ taking sum again we get this inequality: $$\sum_{m=1}^{n}{a_{m+2}-a_{m+1}}< n(\sqrt{2}-1)$$ that is:

$$a_{n+2}-a_{2}<n(\sqrt{2}-1)$$ or $$a_{n+2}<n(\sqrt{2}-1)+\sqrt{2}$$ or $$\sqrt[n+2] {(n+2)!}< n(\sqrt{2}-1)+\sqrt{2}$$ or $${(n+2)!}< \left(n(\sqrt{2}-1)+\sqrt{2}\right)^{n+2}$$

share|improve this answer

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.