n → ∞ lim n 2 ( 1 n ) ( 2 n ) ⋯ ( n n )
Find the closed form of the limit above to 3 decimal places.
Notation: ( k n ) = k ! ( n − k ) ! n ! denotes the binomial coefficient .
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
wow, you leave the table, i.e, you are on another level (at least level VII or something like this) ... I am now trying to understand your solution... Anyway (+1) without any doubt...
Log in to reply
Mutual admiration society... You are the only person (out of more than 70 who have tried) so far to crack my second knight's move Markov chain.
If you Google for the Barnes G-function, Wikipedia or Mathworld between them will give you the relationship to the superfactorial, and the necessary asymptotics.
Log in to reply
Thank you, your second problem about knights will be cracked...Be patient, I'm sure. I had the advantage what I did the first part, which it reduced my solution arrival... Yup, I'm on wikipedia with Barnes G- function,right now....
Let n → ∞ lim n 2 ( 1 n ) ( 2 n ) … ( n n ) = L . Taking the natural logarithm of both sides, we obtain ln ( L ) = n → ∞ lim n 2 1 i = 1 ∑ n ln ( ( i n ) ) = n → ∞ lim n 1 ⋅ n 1 i = 1 ∑ n ( ln ( n ! ) − ln ( i ! ) − ln ( ( n − i ) ! ) ) By Stirling's approximation, this is equivalent to n → ∞ lim n 1 i = 1 ∑ n ( ln ( n ) + 2 n 1 ln ( 2 π n ) − 1 − n i ln ( i ) − 2 n 1 ln ( 2 π i ) + n i − ( 1 − n i ) ln ( n − i ) − 2 n 1 ln ( 2 π ( n − i ) ) + 1 − n i ) By taking limits and cancelling terms, it is clear that this simplifies to n → ∞ lim n 1 i = 1 ∑ n ( ln ( n ) − n i ln ( i ) − ( 1 − n i ) ln ( n − i ) ) = n → ∞ lim n 1 i = 1 ∑ n ( − ln ( 1 − n i ) + n i ln ( i n − 1 ) ) Which by the definiton of a Riemann Sum is equivalent to ∫ 0 1 ( − ln ( 1 − x ) + x ln ( x 1 − 1 ) ) d x Which by standard methods evaluates to 2 1 , and our limit is equal to e ≈ 1 . 6 4 8 7 2 1 2 7 .
Here is my solution.
It is rather simple to prove the following identity, but for those who cannot prove it there is a proof here r = 1 ∏ n ( r n ) = r = 1 ∏ n r 2 r − n − 1 Note that ln r = 1 ∏ n ( r n ) = 2 r = 1 ∑ n r ln r − ( n + 1 ) r = 1 ∑ n ln r
Now, note that by integration by parts k = 1 ∑ n k ln k ∼ ∫ 0 n x lo g x d x = 2 1 n 2 ln n − 4 n 2
Using this and Stirling's approximation that ln n ! ∼ n ln n − n we find 2 r = 1 ∑ n r ln r − ( n + 1 ) r = 1 ∑ n ln r ≈ n 2 ln n − 2 1 n 2 − ( n 2 + n ) ln n + n 2 + n = 2 n 2 − n ln n + n
So x → ∞ lim n 2 ln ∏ r = 1 n ( r n ) = x → ∞ lim 2 n 2 n 2 − 2 n ln n + 2 n = 2 1
So the desired limit is e 2 1 = 1 . 6 4 8 7 2 1 2 7 1 . . . . .
Relevant wikis.- Stirling's formula and Cesaro-Stolz theorem
Stirling's formula is Γ [ x + 1 ] ∼ 2 π x ( e x ) x , as x → ∞ , x ∈ R and this means
if n ∈ N and n is "big" then, n ! ∼ 2 π n ( e n ) n .
Ok, let's call Δ = n → ∞ lim n 2 ( 1 n ) ( 2 n ) . . . ( n n ) ⇒ ln Δ = n → ∞ lim n 2 ln ( 1 n ) ( 2 n ) . . . ( n n ) ⇒ applying Stolz theorem ln Δ = n → ∞ lim n 2 − ( n − 1 ) 2 ln ( 1 n ) ( 2 n ) . . . ( n n ) − ln ( 1 n − 1 ) ( 2 n − 1 ) . . . ( n − 1 n − 1 ) = ln Δ = n → ∞ lim 2 n − 1 ln ( 1 n − 1 ) ( 2 n − 1 ) . . . ( n − 1 n − 1 ) ( 1 n ) ( 2 n ) . . . ( n n ) = n → ∞ lim 2 n − 1 ln ( n − 1 n × n − 2 n … 2 n × 1 n ) = n → ∞ lim 2 n − 1 ln ( n − 1 ) ! n n − 1 = n → ∞ lim 2 n − 1 ln n ! n n = Applying Stirling = n → ∞ lim 2 n − 1 ln n n ⋅ e − n ⋅ 2 π n n n = n → ∞ lim 2 n − 1 ln e n − ln 2 π n = 2 1 Therefore, ln Δ = 2 1 ⇒ Δ = e 2 1
Nice use of Stolz theorem to get the cancellation.
Do you think it's possible to avoid Stirling's approximation completely? Can we justify applying it once more to get that the limit is 2 1 directly?
Log in to reply
It is indeed possible without stirlings approximation: Use Stolz's Theorem a second time after the 4'th equation:
n → ∞ lim 2 n − 1 ln ∏ k = 1 n − 1 k n Stolz = n → ∞ lim 2 ln ( n ! ( n + 1 ) n ⋅ n n − 1 ( n − 1 ) ! ) = n → ∞ lim 2 ln ( n n + 1 ) n = 2 1 ln ( e ) = 2 1
To check the prerequisites for Stolz's Theorem (Version 1), you need to read the line from right to left: The second fraction converges, therefore the original limit exists and has the same value!
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
We have r = 1 ∏ n ( r n ) = ∏ r = 1 n r ! ∏ r = 1 n − 1 r ! ( n ! ) n = n $ ( n − 1 ) $ ( n ! ) n = G ( n + 2 ) G ( n + 1 ) ( n ! ) n using the Sloane/Plouffe superfactorial n $ and the Barnes G-function. Using Stirling's approximation, and similar asymptotics for G , we have n → ∞ lim n n n ! = e − 1 n → ∞ lim n n 2 G ( n + 1 ) = n → ∞ lim n n 2 G ( n + 2 ) = e − 4 3 so that the desired limit is e = 1 . 6 4 8 7 2 1 2 7 1 .