In my maths textbook it asks to prove 2^n<=n! for all n>=4(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

I could prove it no problems using induction but could show 2^n<n! without the equality inequality.

My question is why would the textbook ask for a weaker condition? Is it a misprint?

If I can show < then it automatically implies <= holds as well dosen't it?

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Odd proof?

Loading...

Similar Threads - proof | Date |
---|---|

B Did President Garfield really come up with an alternate proof? | Mar 7, 2018 |

B Fermat's Last Theorem; unacceptable proof, why? | Feb 15, 2018 |

I Proof without words for Heron's formula | Jan 19, 2018 |

I Proof of an Inequality | Dec 19, 2017 |

B A rather simple question | Dec 13, 2017 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**