Convert This Number To Binary First!

Which of the following is a possible integer value of n n such that 2 n 2^n divides 1 × 2 × 3 × × n 1\times2\times3\times\cdots\times n ?

Clarification : n n is a positive integer.

1 n < 1 0 3 1\leq n<10^3 1 0 3 n < 1 0 6 10^3\leq n<10^6 n 1 0 6 n\geq 10^6 There is no solution

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.

6 solutions

Pi Han Goh
Apr 15, 2016

Answer : There is no such n n .


Proof (by contradiction) : Suppose there exists such n n that satisfy the constraint given, then by De Polinac's formula, n ! = prime p n p s p ( n ) \displaystyle n! = \prod_{\text{prime }p\leq n} p^{s_p (n)} where s p ( n ) = j = 1 n p j \displaystyle s_p(n) = \sum_{j=1}^\infty \left \lfloor \dfrac n{p^j} \right \rfloor .

In this case, we want to find the integer n n such that n = s 2 ( n ) = j = 1 n 2 j \displaystyle n = s_2(n) = \sum_{j=1}^\infty \left \lfloor \dfrac n{2^j} \right \rfloor .

Let m m be the smallest integer such that 2 m > n 2^m > n , we can rewrite the summation as:

n = j = 1 n 2 j = j = 1 m 1 n 2 j + j = m n 2 j n = \sum_{j=1}^\infty \left \lfloor \dfrac n{2^j} \right \rfloor = \sum_{j=1}^{m-1} \left \lfloor \dfrac n{2^j} \right \rfloor + \sum_{j=m}^\infty \left \lfloor \dfrac n{2^j} \right \rfloor

Since n 2 m , n 2 m + 1 , n 2 m + 2 , n 2 m + 3 , < 1 \dfrac n{2^m}, \dfrac n{2^{m+1}}, \dfrac n{2^{m+2}}, \dfrac n{2^{m+3}}, \ldots < 1 , then the sum of floor functions of these expressions are equal to 0, thus the latter sum the in expression above is equal 0.

n = j = 1 n 2 j = j = 1 m 1 n 2 j + j = m n 2 j 0 n = \sum_{j=1}^\infty \left \lfloor \dfrac n{2^j} \right \rfloor = \sum_{j=1}^{m-1} \left \lfloor \dfrac n{2^j} \right \rfloor + \cancelto{0}{\sum_{j=m}^\infty \left \lfloor \dfrac n{2^j} \right \rfloor}

Since n 2 j n 2 j \left \lfloor \dfrac n{2^j} \right \rfloor \leq \dfrac n{2^j} , then

n = j = 1 m 1 n 2 j = n 2 1 + n 2 2 + n 2 3 + n 2 m 1 n 2 1 + n 2 2 + n 2 3 + n 2 m 1 1 1 2 1 + 1 2 2 + 1 2 3 + + 1 2 m 1 < 1 2 1 + 1 2 2 + 1 2 3 + + 1 2 m 1 + = 1 \begin{aligned} n &=&\sum_{j=1}^{m-1} \left \lfloor \dfrac n{2^j} \right \rfloor \\ &=& \left \lfloor \dfrac n{2^1} \right \rfloor + \left \lfloor \dfrac n{2^2} \right \rfloor + \left \lfloor \dfrac n{2^3} \right \rfloor + \cdots \left \lfloor \dfrac n{2^{m-1}} \right \rfloor \\ &\leq & \dfrac n{2^1} + \dfrac n{2^2} + \dfrac n{2^3} + \cdots \dfrac n{2^{m-1}} \\ 1 &\leq &\dfrac1{2^1} + \dfrac1{2^2} + \dfrac1{2^3} +\cdots + \dfrac1{2^{m-1}} < \dfrac1{2^1} + \dfrac1{2^2} + \dfrac1{2^3} + \cdots + \dfrac1{2^{m-1}} + \cdots = 1 \end{aligned}

The inequality tells us that 1 < 1 1<1 , which is absurd. Hence, a contradiction.

Moderator note:

Great explanation. What can we say about the integer n n which satisfies

2 n 1 n ! ? 2^{n-1} \mid n!?

Challenge Master: Powers of TWO.

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 2 months ago

Log in to reply

Yes Powers of 2.

Kushagra Sahni - 5 years, 1 month ago
Richard Levine
May 24, 2016

The largest value of x, where 2^x < n, is log2(n). So x+(x-1)+(x-2)+...+1 + (n/2 - x), subtracting x from n/2 to eliminate duplicates, gives the largest exponent of 2 that divides n!. Since x(x+1)/2 is the summation of the x series above, we get (log2(n))(log2(n)+1)/2 + (n-2log2(n))/2 = ((log2(n))(log2(n)-1) + n) / 2. Therefore, (log2(n))(log2(n)-1) has to be >= n for n!/2^n to even have a possible solution. Plug that into Wolfram Alpha or solve it yourself. There is no solution. Note that I didn't use the FLOOR function above for brevity purposes.

McKay Holmes
Apr 24, 2016

(This isnt a solution but I didnt know where to put this) I do have a small problem with this in that 2^0|0!. I think the question should be rewritten to specify positive integers or the answer should be changed to "none of the above"

I've written 1 × 2 × 3 × × n 1\times2\times 3\times \cdots \times n in the question, so it's obvious that n n is a positive integer.

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

I suppose that's true, but It still seems worth it to specify.

McKay Holmes - 5 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

Hmmm. I don't think that's necessary, but fine, I'll add it in.

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 1 month ago
Leonardo Vannini
Apr 24, 2016

There is no solution.

Suppose that n = 2 a n={ 2 }^{ a } .

How many twos are in the prime factorization of ( 2 a ) ! (2^{ a })! ? We can find the maximum power of 2 that divides ( 2 a ) ! (2^{ a })! : this power is 2 2 a 1 { 2 }^{ 2^{ a }-1 } . So it's true that 2 2 a 1 { 2 }^{ 2^{ a }-1 } divides ( 2 a ) ! (2^{ a })! for every a a ; but 2 a 2 a 1 { 2 }^{ a }\neq { 2 }^{ a }-1

I analized only the case n = 2 a n={ 2 }^{ a } because in this case the difference 2 a n { 2 }^{ a }-n is minumum.

But what about non-powers of 2?

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

Sorry! my solution is incomplete. Trying to generalize it I came across a solution (?)

Say f(m) the number of twos that are in the prime factorization of m.

f ( n ! ) = f ( 1 2 3 . . . n ) = [ n 2 ] + [ n 4 ] + . . . + [ n 2 k ] f(n!)=f(1\cdot 2\cdot 3\cdot ...\cdot n)=\left[ \frac { n }{ 2 } \right] +\left[ \frac { n }{ 4 } \right] +...+\left[ \frac { n }{ { 2 }^{ k } } \right]

If is true that 2 n { 2 }^{ n } divides n ! n! then is also true that f ( n ! ) n f\left( n! \right) \ge n\quad and then [ n 2 ] + [ n 4 ] + . . . + [ n 2 k ] n \left[ \frac { n }{ 2 } \right] +\left[ \frac { n }{ 4 } \right] +...+\left[ \frac { n }{ { 2 }^{ k } } \right] \ge n which is an absurd.

So f ( n ! ) < n f(n!)<n .

What do you think about it? I hope not having wrote something wrong.

Leonardo Vannini - 5 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

Yup! That's what I've written in my solution.

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

@Pi Han Goh D: Sorry! ahah P.S: Can we say that a n { a }^{ n } doesn't divide n ! n! for every a>1?

Leonardo Vannini - 5 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

@Leonardo Vannini Yes, we can. Use the same argument in my solution and you will reach the same conclusion.

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 1 month ago
Head Jump
Apr 24, 2016

Let's say you have this integer n n . n ! n! is the product of all integers from 1 1 to n n . First, we see that every second integer in this group is a multiple of 2. This means so far, we know that n ! n! is a multiple of 2 n 2 2^\frac {n} {2} . We also know that every second integer in this group of even integers is a multiple of 4, meaning a fourth of n integers are still even after we took out one factor of 2, so we now know that n ! n! is a multiple of 2 3 n 4 2^\frac {3n} {4} . If we repeat as we are doing now, we will eventually find all the factors of 2 in n ! n! because we will reach a point where, for example, we can't find the 32nd integer in the group because n is 29, meaning that we have found the highest power of 2 that n ! n! is a multiple of. You will notice that no matter how many times we repeat that process, we will never reach n n , only some fraction very close to n n such as 63 n 64 \frac {63n} {64} , meaning that no matter how large n n is, n ! n! can never be a multiple of 2 n 2^n .

I think "There is no solution" is bad wording though, as 0 is a solution, because 0 ! = 2 0 = 1 0! = 2^0 = 1 .

When I write 1 × 2 × × n 1\times 2\times \cdots \times n , it clearly means that n n is a positive integer.

Plus, your argument is not rigorous. You have only shown that there is no solution for 1 n 64 1 \leq n \leq 64 .

Pi Han Goh - 5 years, 1 month ago
Timothy Miller
Apr 9, 2016

2 raised to any power requires the solution to be not merely a multiple of 2, but all of its prime factors equal to 2.

The question is asking us what n! Has as all of its prime factors, 2.

Clearly only 2!

No math required (don't get used it on Brilliant factorial)

I don't get what you are trying to say.

The problem does not ask for 2 n = n ! 2^n = n ! . The problem asks you for when 2 n 2^n divides n ! n! .

Calvin Lin Staff - 5 years, 2 months ago

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...