Evaluate
⌊ 1 2 × 3 4 × 5 6 × ⋯ × 9 7 9 8 × 9 9 1 0 0 ⌋ .
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.
Ugh, approximations. Clever, yes. But ugh. :P
But the Central Binomial Coefficient formula requires n → ∞ . Can you clear this a bit ?
Log in to reply
asymptotic properties
That was the way I conceived this problem, and would be the quick way to make an estimate. Of course, for accuracy, you will need to know how tight these bounds are.
As you can see in my solution, the error is mainly in the first few terms, and dealing with those properly will make the estimate much easier.
missed that square......
Brilliant. I didn't use the asymptotic property though, just Stirling Approximations for 50! and 100!
will you please let me know how did we get 50!
Log in to reply
For what value of n does ( n 2 n ) = ( 5 0 1 0 0 ) ?
factor out 2 from every term in ( 2 × 4 × . . . × 1 0 0 ) 2 to get ( 2 1 0 0 × ( 5 0 ! ) 2 )
Did almost the same. Although used Stirling's approximation n ! = 2 π n ( e n ) n for getting the result.
Why did you name the question as.. slightly bigger than 1.. when the ans is 12?
Log in to reply
Y U ASK ME>?
Each of the terms are slightly bigger than 1. It doesn't necessarily mean that the entire product is slightly bigger than 1. In fact, this product actually tends to infinitely, albeit at a very slow rate (use Pi Han's argument).
Using the formulas for 0 ∫ π / 2 sin n x d x , for n = 9 9 , 1 0 0 , and 1 0 1 , we find that 9 9 ! ! 9 8 ! ! > 1 0 0 ! ! 9 9 ! ! 2 π > 1 0 1 ! ! 1 0 0 ! ! . We rearrange things to see that 2 1 0 0 π < ( 9 9 ! ! 1 0 0 ! ! ) 2 < 2 1 0 1 π , so 1 2 . 5 < 9 9 ! ! 1 0 0 ! ! < 1 2 . 6 . The answer is 1 2 .
In my part of Scotland we respond to something like this with the exclamation
"Ya beauty!".
Oh that's a very nice way to generate that result!
Log in to reply
Could you please add the way @Otto Bretscher did this question in the wiki ?
MIND "BLOWING" BOOM
AWESOME! I learn something new today!
Let A = 1 2 × 3 4 × 5 6 × … × 9 7 9 8 × 9 9 1 0 0 . We will show that 1 4 4 < A 2 < 1 6 9 .
For the lower bound, it suffices to show that
1 × 3 2 2 × 3 × 5 4 2 × 5 × 7 6 2 × … × 9 9 × 1 0 1 1 0 0 2 > 1 0 1 1 4 4 .
This is true because the product of the first 3 terms is 1 7 5 2 5 6 > 1 0 1 1 4 4 , and the rest of the terms are all greater than 1.
For the upper bound, it suffices to show that
3 2 2 × 4 × 5 2 4 × 6 × 7 2 6 × 8 × … × 9 9 2 9 8 × 1 0 0 < 2 0 0 1 6 9 .
Similarly, this is true because the product of the first 3 terms is 1 2 2 5 1 0 2 4 < 2 0 0 1 6 9 , and the rest of the terms are all lesser than 1.
I didn't know how to respond to this one because I couldn't see that approximations would be acceptable. This interactive sequence, in Python, provides exact results:
>> from fractions import Fraction as F
>> product = F ( 2 )
>> for n in range ( 4, 102, 2 ) :
... numerator = F ( n )
... denominator = F ( numerator - 1 )
... product *= numerator / denominator
...
>> product
Fraction(158456325028528675187087900672,
12611418068195524166851562157)
>> 1.*product.numerator/product.denominator
12.5645129018549
Log in to reply
To Bill Bell : The question was about the integer part of the product. In the question, notice the brackets surrounding the product. In other words : int (product) = int(12,564...) = 12.
Log in to reply
Of course, you're right. I often fail to answer correctly because I misread the questions.
Yep, its slightly bigger than one.
Sorry, I didnt understand this bounding terminology. Could you please explain again?
How do you find these bounds?
@Calvin Lin - Could you please explain about bounding to me??
Where is 144/101 and 169/200 come from?
Log in to reply
To prove that A^2 > 144, he divides by 101 on both sides to bring that form and prove that product of first 3 terms is greater than 144/101
Similarly, for the upper bound.
Great solution @Calvin Lin . Although I wonder how it struck you to choose appropriate bounds and obtain that form.
@Calvin Lin , I find your solution to be MUCH better than @Pi Han Goh 's one, as it doesn't depend on asymptotic properties (which are JUST approximations, and ONLY that!).
Failed to investigate why bracket was strange. Turns out it is the floor function...
Log in to reply
Yes, that's a pretty common notation that we use here. There is also ⌈ ⋅ ⌉ for the ceiling function .
{product(2n), n=1 to 50}/{product(2n-1), n=1 to 50}
12.5645
WolframAlpha
Using MAPLE, I find that:
1 2 × 3 4 × ⋯ × 9 9 1 0 0 = 1 2 6 6 1 4 1 8 0 6 8 1 9 5 5 2 4 1 6 6 8 5 1 5 6 2 1 5 7 1 5 8 4 5 6 3 2 5 0 2 8 5 2 8 6 7 5 1 8 7 0 8 7 9 0 0 6 7 2
which is EXACT, and NOT APPROXIMATE (I hate approximations...). Then, one can compute the floor of this "large" fraction to be 1 2 , as required.
Maybe Maple can help you with 9 9 ! ! 1 0 0 ! ! but can it do 9 9 0 0 ! ! 1 0 0 0 0 ! ! ?
class MyClass {
public static void main(String[ ] args) {
double a=1;
for(int n=1;n<=50;n++)
{
a=a*(2*n)/(2*n-1);
}
System.out.println(""+a);
}
}
OUTPUT: 12.5645...
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Let P denote that product. We multiply numerator and denominator by 2 × 4 × 6 × … × 1 0 0 , which gives
P = = = 1 0 0 ! ( 2 × 4 × 6 × … × 1 0 0 ) 2 2 1 0 0 × 1 0 0 ! 5 0 ! 2 2 1 0 0 × ( 5 0 1 0 0 ) 1
Apply the asymptotic properties for Central Binomial Coefficient :
( n 2 n ) ∼ π n 4 n
In this case, n = 5 0
P ≈ 2 1 0 0 × 4 5 0 π × 5 0 = 5 2 π
Hence the answer is ⌊ 5 2 π ⌋ = 1 2