How to Factorize a Large Number for Permutations?

Click For Summary
To factorize a large number for permutations, the discussion highlights the importance of identifying prime factors, particularly for the number 604,800, which is divisible by 100. The method involves testing potential values for n in the permutation formula nP7, starting with lower numbers and working upwards. The example shows that n=10 satisfies the equation for 604,800, while for 3,991,680, n=15 is too large, indicating a missing prime factor. The conversation suggests that quick testing of values can lead to efficient solutions. Understanding the prime factorization is crucial for accurate calculations in permutations.
Nader AbdlGhani
Messages
38
Reaction score
2
Hey guys , Could anyone here tell me the easiest way to solve for n , nP7 = 604800 , the traditional way (I'm currently using) is to divide 604800 by 10 and then 9 and so on until I get 1 as a result of that division , The problem is this way isn't helpful with all permutations I have in my study , some times it gets tricky .
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Notice that 604,800 is divisible by 100, which means that 10 must be one of the numbers in the factors that multiply to give ^nP_7. This is because we only have one prime factor of 5 which can couple with a prime factor of 2 in various ways, such as from 4 or 6 or 8, and that would give a factor of 10, so the other factor of 10 must be from 10 itself, or even 15 (the factor of 5 coupled with another 2 elsewhere). However, 15*14*...*9 is composed of 7 factors that are all mostly larger than 10, so the result is going to be larger than 107 = 10,000,000 which is much too large. So we only have a few to test, starting at 10*9*...*4 and working our way upwards from there. We actually find that n=10 gives the answer, but if for argument's sake we had to solve, say,

^nP_7=3,991,680

Then we know that n=15 is again too large, but now it's also not divisible by 100 any more, which means we're missing a prime factor of 5, and how can that happen? Only with
12*11*...*6
13*12*...*7
14*13*...*8
n being one larger or smaller than these possibilities and we'd end up with the factor of 5 in 5 or 15 and the result would be divisible by 100. So given just a few values to test, the result should be quick to find.
 
  • Like
Likes Nader AbdlGhani
Mentallic said:
Notice that 604,800 is divisible by 100, which means that 10 must be one of the numbers in the factors that multiply to give ^nP_7. This is because we only have one prime factor of 5 which can couple with a prime factor of 2 in various ways, such as from 4 or 6 or 8, and that would give a factor of 10, so the other factor of 10 must be from 10 itself, or even 15 (the factor of 5 coupled with another 2 elsewhere). However, 15*14*...*9 is composed of 7 factors that are all mostly larger than 10, so the result is going to be larger than 107 = 10,000,000 which is much too large. So we only have a few to test, starting at 10*9*...*4 and working our way upwards from there. We actually find that n=10 gives the answer, but if for argument's sake we had to solve, say,

^nP_7=3,991,680

Then we know that n=15 is again too large, but now it's also not divisible by 100 any more, which means we're missing a prime factor of 5, and how can that happen? Only with
12*11*...*6
13*12*...*7
14*13*...*8
n being one larger or smaller than these possibilities and we'd end up with the factor of 5 in 5 or 15 and the result would be divisible by 100. So given just a few values to test, the result should be quick to find.
Thanks for your help :D
 
Nader AbdlGhani said:
Thanks for your help :D
You're welcome!
 
How about finding the factorization of 604800 as a product of primes? Then divide by 2!, then by 3! , etc.
 
I have been insisting to my statistics students that for probabilities, the rule is the number of significant figures is the number of digits past the leading zeros or leading nines. For example to give 4 significant figures for a probability: 0.000001234 and 0.99999991234 are the correct number of decimal places. That way the complementary probability can also be given to the same significant figures ( 0.999998766 and 0.00000008766 respectively). More generally if you have a value that...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K