Relationship between factorials and squares of natural numbers

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between factorials and squares of natural numbers, specifically exploring equations that relate these concepts. Participants examine the validity of certain equations involving factorials and their simplifications, while also discussing related mathematical properties and conjectures.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents two equations involving factorials and squares of natural numbers, questioning their validity and whether they restate known conjectures.
  • Another participant points out that the right-hand side of the equations simplifies due to the denominator being a factor of the numerator.
  • There is a discussion about the term "faculty," with participants clarifying that it refers to "factorial" and "distribution law" refers to "distributive law."
  • A participant raises the question of whether n! is never a perfect square for n > 1, inviting further exploration of this property.
  • Another participant suggests that separating the expansion into composite and prime factors may be a way to approach proving that n! is not a perfect square.
  • One participant mentions that using Bertrand's postulate and checking initial cases could be an easier method to demonstrate the non-square nature of n! for n > 1.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the equations and properties discussed, with no consensus reached on the validity of the initial equations or the proof regarding n! being a perfect square. Multiple competing views and approaches remain present in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about the definitions of terms and properties of factorials may not be explicitly stated, and the discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps regarding the proofs suggested.

Prez Cannady
Messages
21
Reaction score
2
TL;DR
Two equations relating factorials with squares of natural numbers. They seem to work.
Was fooling around and wrote down these two equations today that appear to work. I'm not all that bright and I'm positive these either have some proof or restate some conjecture--probably something in a textbook. Could somebody help me out?

<br /> \forall n \in \mathbb{N}_0\smallsetminus\{0\}<br />
<br /> n^2 = \frac{\left(n + 1 \right)! - n!}{\left(n - 1 \right)!} \\<br />
<br /> \left(n + 1 \right)^2 = \frac{\left(n + 1 \right)! + n!}{\left(n - 1 \right)!} + 1 \\<br />
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The right hand side simplifies in each case as the denominator is a factor of the numerator. E.g ##\frac{n!}{(n-1)!}=n##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Prez Cannady
This is basically the definition of the faculty and the distribution law. If you want to read more about the faculty, which formulas hold, and which generalizations exist, look up the Gamma function, and the Beta function.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Prez Cannady
Is faculty an autocorrect for factorial?
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman and Prez Cannady
PeroK said:
Is faculty an autocorrect for factorial?
Lost in translation, sorry. (We use the same word for both meanings.)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Prez Cannady
PeroK said:
The right hand side simplifies in each case as the denominator is a factor of the numerator. E.g ##\frac{n!}{(n-1)!}=n##

Indeed. Was just curious if there was a name for it or if I'm just writing down n^2 and (n + 1)^2 in a needlessly complicated fashion.
 
fresh_42 said:
Lost in translation, sorry. (We use the same word for both meanings.)
Just so I'm clear:

1. faculty -> factorial
2. distribution law -> distributive law

Is that correct?
 
Prez Cannady said:
Just so I'm clear:

1. faculty -> factorial
2. distribution law -> distributive law

Is that correct?
Yes.
 
@Prez Cannady :
This may interest you: Can you prove## n! ## is never a perfect square for ##n >1 ##?
 
  • #10
Prez Cannady said:
Indeed. Was just curious if there was a name for it or if I'm just writing down n^2 and (n + 1)^2 in a needlessly complicated fashion.
It's so easy to show that I would be surprised if it has gotten more attention.
##\frac{\left(n + 1 \right)! - n!}{\left(n - 1 \right)!} = \frac{(n+1)n(n-1)! - n(n-1)!}{(n-1)!} = \frac{n^2 (n-1)!}{(n-1)!} = n^2##

Factorial and faculty are both "Fakultät" in German.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
  • #11
Interesting... Would one start by separating the expansion to the product of composite factors multiplied by the product of prime factors (the latter can never be a perfect square)?
 
  • #12
valenumr said:
Interesting... Would one start by separating the expansion to the product of composite factors multiplied by the product of prime factors (the latter can never be a perfect square)?
After having chased that rabbit hole and having thought about this more, is it not sufficient to say simply that there is a maximal prime factor with coefficient (edit) exponent 1?
 
Last edited:
  • #13
That's the easiest way to show it, using Bertrand's postulate and checking the first few cases separately.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: valenumr

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K