4 ms·
Yup. I got hung up on that too. I think the article could have better stated it as: For every natural n, there exists a natural b, such that: n! ≈ b^n I don
by kdmccormick 3y ago
Yup. I got hung up on that too. I think the article could have better stated it as:
For every natural n, there exists a natural b, such that: n! ≈ b^n
I don't quite know the precise criteria for "≈" here, that's a bit beyond my understanding of the article...
- throwawaymaths 3y agoHe also mis-typesets it as = on the same line! Very confusing.
- gowld 3y ago≈ is a loose approximation. The fact is that `e * (n!)^(1/n)` is quite close to `n`. But John didn't factor out the `e`, causing the confusion in this HN post's threads.