> What's surprising (to many) is that> n! < exp(n log n)Why would that be surprising? I can see that many wouldn’t know whether it’s true, but exp(n × log n) = exp(log(n) × n) = exp(log(n))^n = n^n and it’s not surprising that 1 × 2 × 3 × 4 × … × n < n × n × n × n × … × n for n > 1
I don't know why that is surprising, but I'm teaching computer science at a university, and students seem surprised every time it comes up.
emil-lp · · focus · HN ↗
n! < exp(n log n)
Someone · · focus · HN ↗
> n! < exp(n log n)
Why would that be surprising? I can see that many wouldn’t know whether it’s true, but
and it’s not surprising that for n > 1emil-lp · · focus · HN ↗
[deleted] · · focus · HN ↗
[deleted]