Note that 7 ! = 1 0 × 9 × 8 × 7 .
What is the largest possible value of n for which n ! can be represented as a product of n − 3 consecutive integers?
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.
that last product series seems forced, and yes, 23 is a brute forced solution, but is it the maximum?
Just a general formula for problems such as this. Say we want the max integer n such that n! can be written as the product of (n-k) consecutive integers. N = ( k + 1 ) ! − 1
That is interesting and true. Could you explain further?
Log in to reply
If we want to maximize n, we need to make it n ! = ( k + 1 ) ! ( n + 1 ) ! . Also, because ( n + 1 ) ! = ( n + 1 ) n ! , we can solve for n from here.
n ! = ( k + 1 ) ! ( n + 1 ) n !
1 = ( k + 1 ) ! ( n + 1 )
( k + 1 ) ! − 1 = n
Log in to reply
Now from a logical stand point, we see that the only digits that can be different between the factorials are the first k+1 digits. Because if the highest digits in each factorial are equal, one will be greater than the other (assuming k doesn't equal 1 or 0) so we divide one by the first k digits, then we multiply it by n+1 and divide by k+1
Consider n = 2 3 . 5 × 6 × 7 × . . . × 2 3 × 2 4 = 4 ! 2 4 ! = 2 3 ! hence it is possible.
Suppose n > 2 3 .
Then 4 × 5 × 6 × . . . × n = 3 ! n ! < n ! are n − 3 consecutive numbers with product less than n ! . This means the smallest among the n − 3 numbers is at least 5.
But 5 × 6 × 7 × . . . × ( n + 1 ) = 4 ! n ! × ( n + 1 ) > 4 ! n ! × 2 5 > n ! , so there exists no such n − 3 consecutive numbers.
In conclusion, the answer is 23.
Sorry, it should be 4 ! n ! × ( n + 1 ) ≥ 4 ! n ! × 2 5
Log in to reply
you can edit your solution by clicking that tiny pencil in the top right
I will start by saying my solution is not as concise or clever as the others. But it led to some interesting things I've never seen before. I set it up with an equation using the Pochhammer function, m ( m + 1 ) n − 4 = n ! considering only the greater part of the first quadrant. Due to the asymptotic nature of this relation, there is not a solution at m = 4 , but there is at m = 5 . Sure enough, the solution is at ( 5 , 2 3 ) .
Now here's the interesting part. Unless my calculator is mistaken, the graph makes a very very very nice pattern in the other quadrants (of course, substituting the gamma function for factorial). In fact, I might even put it on a quilt!
Let k : = 3 and write the n − k consecutive integers as ( n + i ) ; … ; ( i + k + 1 ) , p i : = ( n + i ) ⋅ … ⋅ ( i + k + 1 ) = ( k + i ) ! ( n + i ) ! , p 0 = k ! n ! < n !
Clearly p i increases as i increases, so if p 1 > n ! , we will not find a solution: p 1 ≤ ! n ! ⇒ ( k + 1 ) ! ( n + 1 ) ! ≤ ! n ! ⇒ n ≤ ! ( k + 1 ) ! − 1
Luckily the factorial of the maximum value n = ( k + 1 ) ! − 1 ( ∗ ) can be represented by n ! = n ⋅ … ⋅ ( k + 2 ) ⋅ ( k + 1 ) ! ( ∗ ) = ( n + 1 ) ⋅ n ⋅ … ⋅ ( k + 2 ) ∣ ( n − k ) consecutive integers!
and the answer is n = ( 3 + 1 ) ! − 1 = 2 3
We have to find a number p such that satisfies the equality n ! = ( p + n ) ( p − 1 + n ) ( p − 2 + n ) ⋯ ( p − ( n − 4 ) + n ) , where p ≥ 1 . However, by checking we find, for n = 4 , p = 2 0 , for n = 6 , p = 4 , for n = 7 , p = 3 , for n = 2 3 , p = 1 , so we must stop here, and conclude, the required result is n = 2 3 .
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
My first approach was to do some brute force hand calcs to get a feel for the question and try to pick up any patterns. After a while I realised 3 ! n ! < n ! and therefore 3 ! n ! < ( 3 + k ) ! ( n + k ) ! < n ! for certain values of k up to some limit.
So if we want to find a solution we can set the second two parts of the inequality to be equal: ( 3 + k ) ! ( n + k ) ! = n ! I figured since both sides have n! in some forms I could probably cancel it out... And with some more algebra I arrived at this product series i = 1 ∏ k ( n + i ) = 3 ! ⋅ i = 1 ∏ k ( 3 + k )
And here the RHS does not change as you increase n, and I also thought (since the question suggested there was a maximum number) k would be 1 for the largest n, and so we have n + 1 = 3 ! ∗ ( 3 + 1 ) and so n = 2 3
I think I was half trying to find a simple iterative equation I could plug into python but it was much more satisfying arriving at the solution on paper. Great question!