Inequality involving two unknowns and factorials

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves proving the inequality n!/r! >= r^(n-r) where n and r are natural numbers with n >= r. The original poster discusses the factorial expressions and their manipulation but expresses uncertainty in progressing further with the proof.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster considers using induction as a method to prove the inequality and explores the implications of setting specific values for r. Other participants suggest alternative reasoning based on the properties of the factorial and the terms involved.

Discussion Status

Participants are engaging with different approaches to the problem, including induction and direct comparison of terms. There is a recognition of the validity of various methods, and some participants appreciate the simplicity of alternative reasoning presented.

Contextual Notes

There is a note regarding the assumption of r being equal to 1, which raises questions about the generality of the approach. The discussion reflects on the nature of the variables and their constraints within the problem.

Rosey24
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
I need to prove the following:
n!/r! >= r^(n-r)

With r and n as natural numbers and n>=r
I know the LHS will end up being (n-r) terms long as the first r! will cancel out of n! (n>=r), but as they're both unknown, I just left it as
1*2*3*...*(n-2)*(n-1)*n

1*2*3*...*(r-2)*(r-1)*r

and I looked at the RHS as r^n/r^r, but I'm not sure how to work with these two sides. :rolleyes:

Any tips on different ways to approach this would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!


Update: Is it enough to do the following, using induction:
Prove that for n=1, it works as 1 >= 1
and then, assuming the inequality holds for n, try n+1:
(n+1)!/r! >= r^[(n+1)-r]
which is just
n!(n+1)/r! >= r^(n-r)*r
and, as n>=r, (n+1)>=r, so, by induction, it's holds for all n.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
That's the way I would do it! For a moment I thought- "He's assuming r= 1 and he can't do that", but you can. Since r is a natural number, less than or equal to n, if n= 1 then r= 1.
 
LHS= (r+1)*(r+2)...*n , there are n-r terms and each term is greater than r . Hence, the LHS is greater than r^(n-r), right?
 
Ahh I like the way this new guy thinks :) Much simpler than induction, original and just plain :) which is good lol.
 
Thanks to everyone who responded!

I appreciate the simplicity of your response, huyen_vyvy. One small note: it's a she who assumed r=1, not a he.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K