Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

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...


≈ 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.


He also mis-typesets it as = on the same line! Very confusing.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: