Can we have negative factorial?

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ต.ค. 2024
  • Learn more math and science with brilliant.org, brilliant.org/... ,
    The first 200 people to sign up will get 20% off your subscription, and you can support my channel too!
    We will figure out if we can do the factorial of -1/2 and the factorial of -1. We will be using the extension of factorial via the Pi function and the Gamma function. I will also give a summary at the end on when we can have negative factorials.
    Pi & Gamma functions: • Introduction to the Ga...
    0^0 convention: • 0^0=1 is "seriesly" us... ,
    negative factorial, • Can we have negative f...
    Subscribe for more math for fun videos 👉 bit.ly/3o2fMNo
    💪 Support this channel, / blackpenredpen
    🛍 Shop math t-shirt & hoodies: bit.ly/bprpmerch. (10% off with the code "WELCOME10")

ความคิดเห็น • 408

  • @heliocentric1756
    @heliocentric1756 6 ปีที่แล้ว +378

    10:50 Why the inequality method doesn't work?
    Can't we solve it like this?
    For t between 0 to 1:
    e^t is smaller than or equal e,
    so 1/e^t is greater than or equal 1/e
    so 1/(te^t) is greater than or equal 1/(et)
    so the integral from 0 to 1 of 1/te^t diverge

    • @blackpenredpen
      @blackpenredpen  6 ปีที่แล้ว +265

      OMG! You are right!
      I forgot for that bound is from 0 to 1...
      This is what happens when I have to do two different types of improper integral back to back...

    • @Prxwler
      @Prxwler 5 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      Are you argentinian?

    • @udayadityabhattacharyya7496
      @udayadityabhattacharyya7496 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @@Prxwler ttrrrryyyrfi

    • @mujahidrao7278
      @mujahidrao7278 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      What is the Integration of {x+1/x}½ ?
      Please solve this problem.🙏🙏🙏

  • @Jacob-uy8ox
    @Jacob-uy8ox 6 ปีที่แล้ว +256

    try to do a complex factorial

    • @SEBithehiper945
      @SEBithehiper945 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      You can do it like this: When doing Π(z), plug in complex integration.

    • @Jeehd
      @Jeehd 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      💀

    • @sgiri2012
      @sgiri2012 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@SEBithehiper945 How to actually calculate the negative number factorial without the intervention of gamma function plot. I want to plot (-1/3)!,(-2/3)!,(-5/3)!,... etc. i tried to solve by gamma integral. But didn't ended up in answer

  • @ramez2775
    @ramez2775 6 ปีที่แล้ว +453

    "How many ways can you arrange negative 1 apples?"
    ...

    • @alexwang982
      @alexwang982 5 ปีที่แล้ว +25

      R.
      1

    • @yosefmacgruber1920
      @yosefmacgruber1920 5 ปีที่แล้ว +22

      @@alexwang982
      Oh really? Then n! for n

    • @alexwang982
      @alexwang982 5 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      @@yosefmacgruber1920 gamma function, mate
      and we meet again!

    • @Fokalopoka
      @Fokalopoka 4 ปีที่แล้ว +14

      @@alexwang982 using gamma function (-1)! diverges, and you cant even say that you can arrange it infinitely many ways, limit of x! as x->-1 doesnt exist

    • @Fokalopoka
      @Fokalopoka 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      also gamma of -1 is 0!, remember your definitions

  • @ScottMaday
    @ScottMaday 5 ปีที่แล้ว +154

    *someone:* how many ways can you arrange negative half of a quarter
    *me:* square root of pi ways.

    • @arnavanand8037
      @arnavanand8037 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      You are too uneducated mathematically for this channel

    • @ham1533
      @ham1533 4 ปีที่แล้ว +11

      Robin Sailo I think he meant -1/2 of a quarter (coin)

    • @chaoticstorm8145
      @chaoticstorm8145 4 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      @@arnavanand8037 Ohh and you're too educated for a joke?

    • @chaoticstorm8145
      @chaoticstorm8145 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @@arnavanand8037 get over yourself buddy

    • @sakuhoa
      @sakuhoa 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@arnavanand8037 you too sit, have a nice day.

  • @MichaelGrantPhD
    @MichaelGrantPhD 2 ปีที่แล้ว +41

    As I said in your poll, this is a definition issue. There are of course well defined ways to extend the factorial function beyond the nonnegative integers. But the exclamation mark is reserved for that original, integral definition. It's unfortunate that the Gamma function is "off by one" or it would be easy to just use that and call it a day.

    • @GRBtutorials
      @GRBtutorials 2 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      The Π function (mentioned in the video) is what you’re looking for, it’s the Γ function, but displaced by 1 unit: Π(x) = Γ(x+1).

    • @MichaelGrantPhD
      @MichaelGrantPhD 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@GRBtutorials thank you!

  • @sdsa007
    @sdsa007 2 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Thank you! This is very advanced for me , but I am so glad I can find answers to my math questions! Awesome!

  • @factsheet4930
    @factsheet4930 6 ปีที่แล้ว +22

    Great this reminded me of the old questions we got back in elementary school where they asked things like:
    2_2_2_2 =
    and you had to put signs in to make it equal as many numbers as you could usually like from 0 to 10
    but now knowing whats -0.5! there is a cool question you can ask your friends
    2_2_2_2=π
    and see if they can solve it!
    my solution is (-2^(-2)*2)!^2=π

  • @donotlaughagain5093
    @donotlaughagain5093 6 ปีที่แล้ว +63

    factOREO!

  • @jorgeeduardopereztasso6134
    @jorgeeduardopereztasso6134 6 ปีที่แล้ว +46

    I remember that in my Calculus exam my teacher put a question with that divergent integral... It took me like all the exam time to realize that cannot be solved. XD

  • @nicholasleclerc1583
    @nicholasleclerc1583 6 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    14:11
    “That I want my students to show...”
    OMG !! YOU HAVE STUDENTS !!!

  • @michaelspence2508
    @michaelspence2508 5 ปีที่แล้ว +45

    You could also look at (-1)! as a sequence. Every time you subtract 1 you multiply by a larger value (in terms of absolute value) and change the sign. Roughly speaking it looks (vaguely) like the graph of x*sin(x) in that it approaches both infinity AND negative infinity which is why saying (-1)! = infinity is incorrect.

    • @pon1
      @pon1 ปีที่แล้ว

      If we treat the number line from negative infinity to positive infinity as a infinite circle then the undefined part is when both ends meet at infinity, I think they showed that each undefined part has its own infinity, I think there's some mathematical theory that uses that.

    • @VenThusiaist
      @VenThusiaist ปีที่แล้ว

      Not necessarily.
      Remember, Infinity is a concept, so if you want, you can treat infinity like a number, but not exactly like one.
      Like the idea of ∞+n=∞ and 1/0≠+∞ or -∞, but instead is 1/0=±∞

    • @orngng
      @orngng ปีที่แล้ว

      @@VenThusiaist What do you mean "not necessarily", only to reply with something else that doesn't follow up on the original comment

    • @VenThusiaist
      @VenThusiaist ปีที่แล้ว

      @@orngng
      did you even look at the last part :|
      Listen, (-1)! gets you a vertical asymtope as you can literally see in the graph of Π(x), and a vertical asymtope has the value of 1/0, which could possibly be ±∞.
      The original comment literally described a vertical asymtope is and why it's a problem to 1/0.
      Do YOU understand what the comment is even saying?

    • @VenThusiaist
      @VenThusiaist ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@pon1 That is called "Wheel Algebra", my friend.

  • @Filip6754
    @Filip6754 6 ปีที่แล้ว +279

    But can you do dis?

    • @PeterAuto1
      @PeterAuto1 6 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      Yes, cause e^t in the interval [0,1] is always less than e, so if you replace e^t with e the value gets smaller. and cause e is a constant it can be ignored entirely.

    • @azharhaque9
      @azharhaque9 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Chvocht - thats how i found this video aswell, dont even know why i clicked on it

    • @quarkonium3795
      @quarkonium3795 6 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      Peter Auto r/wooosh

    • @thenixaless7493
      @thenixaless7493 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Yes *Leans Chair Backwards*

    • @greenpewdiepie4207
      @greenpewdiepie4207 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@PeterAuto1 I know this was 4 years ago but woooooosh dude

  • @johi5951
    @johi5951 6 ปีที่แล้ว +56

    Ok ok i can do neg factorials...
    BUT CAN YOU DO THIS?

  • @trueriver1950
    @trueriver1950 6 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    I prefer the second method, from 16:00 onwards - it is much more intuitively appealing
    If you insist on using the PI function we can still do the same
    Having already shown the relationship
    PI (n) = n.PI (n-1)
    in an earlier video, we can simply apply this result instead of repeating the Laplace integral again.

    • @yosefmacgruber1920
      @yosefmacgruber1920 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Would ∏(n) = n • ∏(n-1) be an improvement upon your syntax, or did I do it wrong in some way?

  • @blackpenredpen
    @blackpenredpen  6 ปีที่แล้ว +14

    Why Gamma function? check out this page math.stackexchange.com/questions/1537/why-is-eulers-gamma-function-the-best-extension-of-the-factorial-function-to

    • @Neo-po2xw
      @Neo-po2xw 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      blackpenredpen so what's 0.5! ?

  • @Mephisto707
    @Mephisto707 6 ปีที่แล้ว +24

    Can you show us the graph of the Pi function?

    • @MathNerdGamer
      @MathNerdGamer 6 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      Take the Gamma function's graph and shift to the left by 1, because Pi(x) = Gamma(x+1).

  • @Qoow8e1deDgikQ9m3ZG
    @Qoow8e1deDgikQ9m3ZG 5 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    instead of saying (-1)! is undefined or infinity, I think there is a need to put a strict and new definition to something like 1=0*infinity .... maybe something new symbol that is very super and like complex number i that avoid explain what is sqrt(-1)

  • @themsk9923
    @themsk9923 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    You are literally bringing those questions which i always thought about 👍 thanks 😊

  • @igorzigmaker5785
    @igorzigmaker5785 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    I don't know why but hat scream at the very end just scared me so freaking much.

    • @blackpenredpen
      @blackpenredpen  6 ปีที่แล้ว

      sorry.... I think I forgot to lower the volume on that..

  • @purim_sakamoto
    @purim_sakamoto 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    ふぇええ こうやって拡張できるのがガンマ関数の面白いところですねえ
    そして(-1)!がこれまた面白い

  • @flamingpaper7751
    @flamingpaper7751 6 ปีที่แล้ว +32

    Can you take the factorial of complex numbers, like i or 1+i? Or even quaternions like 1+i+j+k?

    • @bonkuto7679
      @bonkuto7679 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      That would be cool just try and plug it in and see what happens

    • @wraithlordkoto
      @wraithlordkoto 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@bonkuto7679 I don't think there is a meaningful or useful notion of what it means to raise a number to a quaternion exponent power

    • @The-Devils-Advocate
      @The-Devils-Advocate 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@wraithlordkoto maybe not in today’s conditions of math and science

    • @wraithlordkoto
      @wraithlordkoto 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@The-Devils-Advocate I dont remember what it means, but quaternion exponents are a thing actually

    • @The-Devils-Advocate
      @The-Devils-Advocate 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@wraithlordkoto I meant that they might not be useful today, but later they could be, like imaginary numbers

  • @lill_m8
    @lill_m8 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Me: Can we have (-1)! at home?
    Mom: We have (-1)! at home.
    (-1)! at home: Undefined

  • @odysseus9672
    @odysseus9672 ปีที่แล้ว

    (-1)! is undefined, but 1/(-1)! = 0 just fine. You can show this without resorting to the gamma function by considering the number of ways to write n symbols in a list of length k. That is given by n! / (n-k)!. First: how many ways are there to write the list when it has length n? n!, obviously, but that requires 0! = 1. Similarly, if k = 0 the formula gives 1, but that is also 0!. Put another way, there is one way to write an empty list, just put the grouping symbols (that avoids the philosophical worry over how to arrange 0 things). Second: how many ways are there to write the list when k > n? Zero ways, because you can never successfully write such a list, but that requires n!/(n-k)! = 0 for k > n.

  • @tomatrix7525
    @tomatrix7525 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Extremely nice vid bprp

  • @thepipe6397
    @thepipe6397 6 ปีที่แล้ว +18

    That was a good clickbait tittle, i stoped immediately what i was doing.

  • @ebz4125
    @ebz4125 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Was wondering if you can make a video on the analytical continuation / poles of the gamma function? That'd be interesting.

  • @VSP4591
    @VSP4591 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Very ingenious. Congratulation.

  • @meryemnour9996
    @meryemnour9996 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thank you

  • @НикитаБалк-ц5ъ
    @НикитаБалк-ц5ъ 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    15:58 i definitely heard "Ладно я шучу"

  • @AbouTaim-Lille
    @AbouTaim-Lille 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    f(t) = 1/e^t is absolutely continuous over any closed interval and it has a max and min in the [O, 1] so it is easy to compare the initial integral with that of 1/t multiplied by some certain constant which is Devergent.

  • @homer4590
    @homer4590 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    I don't understand all of this but it's fun to watch him get going on math

  • @tejing2001
    @tejing2001 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The Pi function has a singularity at each negative integer, but because those singularities are poles, not essential singularities, it is reasonable (so long as you take appropriate care) to say the value at those points is projective infinity in much the same way that other intuitive processes (like splitting up dy/dx and working with the dy and dx as individual values, or pretending the dirac delta is a function even though it isn't) are not only reasonable, but helpful, so long as you properly account for the caveats. That said, it is safer, if you're not confident of your ability to properly handle the caveats, to just say the value is undefined.

  • @XESolar
    @XESolar 6 ปีที่แล้ว +38

    Complex factorials possible?

    • @davidrheault7896
      @davidrheault7896 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Yes, GAMMA in complex analysis is a meromorphic function, it has poles with residues at negative integers, and you can compute the integral in all the positive complex domain (Re(z)>0 otherwise the integral in undefined). Beware the real part of z being negative though since you need the mirror to compute the analytic conitnuation, example , GAMMA (-3.15) = pi/sin(pi*(-3.15_)/GAMMA(4.15), same thing goes for any complex value with negative real part, you need to mirror into the original domain,
      GAMMA(z) = pi/sin(pi*z)/GAMMA(1-z)

    • @PhasmidTutorials
      @PhasmidTutorials 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      materiasacra

    • @davidrheault7896
      @davidrheault7896 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Yes, since Re(z)=1 >0, the integral is convergent, GAMMA(1+i) = .4980156681-.1549498284*I

    • @dlevi67
      @dlevi67 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Whatever the hell a "factorial" of a non-ordered field means. :-D

    • @alexwang982
      @alexwang982 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      reddit.com

  • @veetaha
    @veetaha 6 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Hey blackpenredpen. May I clarify something about your students? According to me, I study at the top 2 (or 1) university of Ukraine, and our students are so lazy that about 60% of all of them at my specialty do not pass calculus exam ('cause we have a strict tutor=)). So the question is: how many students pass your exams in average?

  • @joaomarcosdossantos7593
    @joaomarcosdossantos7593 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Hi, I really enjoy your videos. Could you show something about the wau(or digamn) number. I saw it, and got curious. Thanks for your amazing videos here.

    • @dlevi67
      @dlevi67 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      It's all one.
      Check the date of the "wau" video.

  • @atrumluminarium
    @atrumluminarium 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    If I remember correctly, there's a neat trick where you can "extract" the divergences/poles (on the negative integers) by using the by-parts expansion of Γ. This gives
    Γ(x)=Γ(x-n)/(x(x-1)...(x-n)) or something along those lines (it has been a while since I did complex analysis so my memory is a bit hazy) where you end up with the first n poles along the negative integers in the denominator.

  • @قرآنكريم-ش8ز3ص
    @قرآنكريم-ش8ز3ص 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thank's very much

  • @NLproductions-xo2gq
    @NLproductions-xo2gq 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This method can work because
    0!=0*(0-1)! which gives you 1=0*(-1)! which if you do in another way 0-1=-1 then you can say 1=1/-1*(-1)! then you get (-1)!=1/1*(-1)! which you tern the 1/1=1 then you put the factorial in front of the positive one and multiply it by (-1) which would look something like (-1)!=1!*(-1) which then 1!=1 so then you get (-1)!=1*(-1) which then equals to (-1)!=-1 because 1 multiplied by -1 = -1 so this means this works and (-1)! does exist and equals -1

  • @bitcoinbuy
    @bitcoinbuy 2 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Kudos to those who understood this

  • @giladu.6551
    @giladu.6551 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Keep doing what you're doing!

  • @peanut12345
    @peanut12345 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Yet sqrt -1 is Real, no -1! is UNREAL, Euler had Whiskey on Weekends.

  • @Whateverbro24
    @Whateverbro24 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Please do a video on complex numbers factorials

    • @blackpenredpen
      @blackpenredpen  6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I will try!

    • @yosefmacgruber1920
      @yosefmacgruber1920 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@blackpenredpen
      And what about quaternion factorials? Is there any such thing? Are quaternions the ultimate numbers?

  • @__fahim.__123
    @__fahim.__123 ปีที่แล้ว

    I used feynman's technique although its undefined its a pleasure to use that technique like its soo gud yk

  • @General12th
    @General12th 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Yay! This makes so much sense!

  • @Xnoob545
    @Xnoob545 6 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    James Grime (on numberphile) extended the function and it didn't work... i mean it kinda worked... i guess...
    -1! = 1÷0

    • @themanofiron785
      @themanofiron785 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Well the result is right...you still end up with infinity :)

  • @MultiJoan09
    @MultiJoan09 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    i have a question. pi(x) is a good function for factorials. But pi(x)*cos(2*pi*x) it's also a correct function for factorials. Why do use one and not the other one

  • @MrRyanroberson1
    @MrRyanroberson1 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    3:48 actually i made a comment similar to this in a peyam video.
    as a polynomial of degree 6 differentiated 7 times should get 0, if we differentiate 5.5 times to get a degree of 1/2, differentiate again for a power of -1/2, and finally half-differentiate then the 7th derivative of x^6 ~ 1/x

  • @VikasKumar-jz5mv
    @VikasKumar-jz5mv 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Sir U r great,👍👍👍💥💥💥💥

  • @ARAVINDKUMAR-ug7gt
    @ARAVINDKUMAR-ug7gt 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Great sir

  • @randomviewer896
    @randomviewer896 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    It's worth noting that as you approch (-1)! from the negative side, then it diverges to negative infinity too.

    • @VenThusiaist
      @VenThusiaist ปีที่แล้ว

      Like I have said many times before,
      It is *_undefined_* due to *_definition issues._*
      A common solution used by the math community is ±∞ as it's own value instead of +∞ or -∞.

  • @rakshithgowda1606
    @rakshithgowda1606 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Let g be a continuous function which is not differentiable at 0 and let g(0) = 8. If
    f(x) = x.g(x), then f(0)?
    A) 0 B) 4 C) 2 D) 8.

  • @williamwong03
    @williamwong03 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    you are fooking instant. recall and teach my math a lot~~~

  • @iloveevermore13
    @iloveevermore13 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    4! 24
    We divide 4 and
    3! 6
    We divide 3 and
    2! 2
    We divide 2 and
    1! 1
    We divide 1 and
    0! 1
    We divide "0" and
    -1! 1/0 nondefined
    We divide -1 and
    -2! -1/0 nondefined
    And for other negatife numbers x/0

  • @Sans-bd3bn
    @Sans-bd3bn 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Me: hmmm lets open youtupe because i am tired of studying
    This man:

  • @elliottmanley5182
    @elliottmanley5182 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Have you thought about bringing your accessible approach to explaining derangements, subfactorials and the partial gamma function?
    When I first researched this, I find the appearance of e unexpected and delightful and the appearance of the nearest integer function completely counter intuitive.
    Now I've started looking at the analytic continuation of subfactorials and I find it counter intuitive in two ways. First that, as far as I can tell, it's defined everywhere, including negative integers and second that it maps real numbers into the complex plain.

  • @ffggddss
    @ffggddss 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Behavior of factorial in the vicinity of a negative integer:
    When n is a positive integer, and ε is an infinitesimal quantity,
    (-n + ε)! ~ (-1)¹⁻ⁿ·n!/ε
    An interesting plot to show this, is y = 1/x!
    It oscillates for x < 0, crossing the x-axis for each negative integer; the amplitude increases "factorially" as x becomes more negative.
    For x > 0, y > 0, and goes asymptotically to 0 as x increases toward ∞.
    y has a local maximum for x between 0 and 1.
    Fred

  • @haydenkarkainen1167
    @haydenkarkainen1167 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Rip negative integers, thanks for the video!

  • @billprovince8759
    @billprovince8759 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    While (-1)! is undefined, it seems that you should be able to show that lim(x --> -1+, x!) approaches +inf.

    • @dlevi67
      @dlevi67 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Yes, but the same limit approached from the left approaches -inf, hence the "undefined".

    • @billprovince8759
      @billprovince8759 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Agreed: There's a nice plot of the Gamma function (not the Pi function) at Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_function

    • @billprovince8759
      @billprovince8759 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @Gerben van Straaten Agreed: The value is undefined, because you reach different limits if you approach from left vs right. In fact, my comment shows that approaching -1 from above (i.e., x --> -1+), it approaches infinity.

  • @koskovictor5095
    @koskovictor5095 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    To blackpenredpen
    You analytically continue the integral so maybe maybe not using the integral for one partial gamma and sum for the other help get -1!. That's how mathematicians convergent for all values. Solve for f(n) being 1/(n!) and the solution for -1 is 0 thus defined. Also 1/0 the solution is unsigned ∞ and technically greater than ∞ so calling it ∞ is inaccurate. It's rather unsigned 1/0.
    Take the sum equation for for example sin and instead use it with sum replaced by integral from -∞ to ∞, averaging all multiple solutions in complex math of each integrand, and no dt.
    Now the negative coefficient multiply by f(n)=0 so zero out so 1/0 for result for factorials is valid.

  • @madhavstalks3925
    @madhavstalks3925 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Loved video

  • @happydmitry
    @happydmitry 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Could you please calculate (e)! and (pi)!
    ?

    • @Cjnw
      @Cjnw 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      (e)! = 4.2608204741
      (pi)! = 7.1880827328

    • @yosefmacgruber1920
      @yosefmacgruber1920 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Cjnw
      How about calculating it in symbolic form, rather than decimal approximation?

    • @Fokalopoka
      @Fokalopoka 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@yosefmacgruber1920 goodluck dealing with x^(pi) in a integral, if its doable, then its way over calc 2 level

    • @yosefmacgruber1920
      @yosefmacgruber1920 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Fokalopoka
      Didn't the suggestion imply that somebody of a high mathematical level, such as a serious mathematician, do it, or at least somebody who thinks that they can produce an answer? But if it is the approximation of an infinite summation, then perhaps it is impossible to do it symbolically, until somebody sees some insight as to another way to do it. But we could write the infinite summation as the answer?

    • @Fokalopoka
      @Fokalopoka 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@yosefmacgruber1920 im pretty sure it doesnt have a nice series, because of x^π, by nics series, i mean a series that will help at integration

  • @aaronrashid2075
    @aaronrashid2075 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    So this means that the factorial is undefined for all negative integers right?

  • @chrisrybak4961
    @chrisrybak4961 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Great! So, as 0! = 1! = 1 but n!

  • @zubiiiiii_
    @zubiiiiii_ 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    I can barely understand anything but its so satysfying to watch lol

  • @rifaturrahman5779
    @rifaturrahman5779 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Wait can't we integrate e^(-t)/t by Feynman/Leibnitz rule?

    • @pizzy1992
      @pizzy1992 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Eventi with that technic it doesn't converge

  • @thesardaunatv
    @thesardaunatv 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thank you
    Mentor

  • @nutdanaiwongsomsak9162
    @nutdanaiwongsomsak9162 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    3! = 1*2*3 = 6
    2! = 3! /3 = 2
    So that means
    (n-1)! = n!/n
    (-1)! = 0!/0= 1/0 = undefined

  • @KannaKamui21000
    @KannaKamui21000 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    So can we conclude that f : x => x! is defined on R/Z-* ?

  • @mat_yt_7835
    @mat_yt_7835 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    DEAR SIR, I REQUEST YOU TO POST VIDEOS ON MULTIPLE INTEGRALS

  • @Cardgames4children
    @Cardgames4children 6 ปีที่แล้ว +57

    Gamma upsets me. The pi function is much more logical! What gives?!

    • @brandonklein1
      @brandonklein1 6 ปีที่แล้ว +31

      Also, putting in any n+1 to the gamma function... You'll find that it gives the same integral as the pi function by subtracting 1! The gamma function has a very useful property that gamma (x+1)=x gamma (x) which flirts very closely with the Reimann Zeta Function and a ton of other series in higher math

    • @atrumluminarium
      @atrumluminarium 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Gamma function is usually much more convenient when studying the Riemann Zeta function

    • @tracyh5751
      @tracyh5751 6 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      gamma function also arises in statistics very naturally.

    • @CharlesPanigeo
      @CharlesPanigeo 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@tracyh5751 yep! Gamma distributions are useful for modeling continuous random variable distributions that are positively skewed. Also, other distributions like the chi squared distribution, and the exponinetial distribution are really special cases of the gamma distribution.

    • @MarcoMa210
      @MarcoMa210 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      The gamma function is indeed very convenient for the riemann zeta function, but what i really don't get is people using it for calculating simple factorials, WHY??? You are doing more work when you could be using the capital pi function which is simpler.

  • @linknero1
    @linknero1 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    so which for negative numbers are indetermined the factorial function?

  • @divergentmaths
    @divergentmaths 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    (-1)! = Γ(0) = γ (the Euler-Mascheroni constant)

  • @rubikonium9484
    @rubikonium9484 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    3:48 that voice crack though

  • @TheLifeLaVita
    @TheLifeLaVita 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    (-1)! it’s easy:
    you can just use (-1)!=1/0
    if you put it on the “recall” part it goes fine:
    0!= 0 * (-1)!
    1=0*(-1)!
    1=0*1/0
    (0 and 0 cancels out)
    1=1 so 1/0 is a solution

  • @snakespeak
    @snakespeak 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Brilliant!

  • @seemajois3263
    @seemajois3263 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Can you please make a video on i factorial?
    !'i!'¡ looks good with Spanish exclaimation mark.😆

  • @atharvaverma5013
    @atharvaverma5013 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    Blackpenredpen when I tried it on Hiper scientific calculator shows that (-1)! is -1

  • @dragweb7725
    @dragweb7725 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    We could also work it up like this:
    2! = 1×1×2
    1! = 2!/2 = 1×1
    0! = 1!/1 = 1
    (-1)! = 0!/0 = undefined

  • @pervezdar7340
    @pervezdar7340 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    In general sir....
    Tell me that ...
    Can we find ( R )!
    Where R is any real number...

  • @ronitmandal7301
    @ronitmandal7301 6 ปีที่แล้ว +31

    But can you do this?!

  • @andreamonteroso8586
    @andreamonteroso8586 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    can you do Gamma(n+1/2) and Gamma(-n+1/2) formula? pls

  • @cicik57
    @cicik57 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    can you also view it as the series of sum ,and easy compare to known harmonic series and 1/n^2 series

  • @willpearson
    @willpearson ปีที่แล้ว

    I think it's a logical leap to say the pi function is equivalent to the factorial function. Just because the pi function happens to intersect with positive integers for the factorial function does not mean it *is* the factorial function. The factorial function is defined by using integers.

  • @mondherbouazizi4433
    @mondherbouazizi4433 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    In the second part of the check, why not just say that (1/(t*e(t))) is always bigger than (1/t*e) {which is here 1/(t*e(1))} in the interval (0,1] and since the integral of {(1/t) * Constant} diverges, the other integral diverge as well?
    Edit: Recall, the integral of the function between these two values is the area beneath it.

  • @syedmdabid7191
    @syedmdabid7191 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    We know that facorial of every negative natural number is undefined or infinitinty but the factorial of every fraction whther positive or negative is defined and real.

  • @cosimobaldi03
    @cosimobaldi03 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    Well if we know half! = root pi /2, then by a property of the gamma function (half - 1)! = half! /half = 2*half! = root pi.

  • @himanshumallick2269
    @himanshumallick2269 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Riemann Zeta function's integral expression involves gamma function.
    We know that Riemann Zeta function is defined everywhere in the complex plane (by analytic continuation), except for the line where Re(z)=1. Thus Zeta(-n) is defined (where n a positive integer). But when (-n) is plugged into the integral expression,the zeta function (LHS) is defined whereas RHS is undefined because gamma (-n) is undefined. How to resolve this problem????

    • @davidrheault7896
      @davidrheault7896 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      himanshu mallick zeta integral is only convergent for Re(z)>1 the same thing for GAMMA function (Re(z)>0). For any negative complex number I mean the real part you need to use the mirror for the analytic continuation (functional equation)

  • @protasov-by
    @protasov-by 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Hey! Maybe if factorial of (-1/2) i.e. -0.5! is sqrt(pi) then maybe if there is some rule as one factorial solution can be written as summ of other factorial solutions, then ! (-1) can be calculated and finally be defined from that?

  • @leonardobarrera2816
    @leonardobarrera2816 ปีที่แล้ว

    16:03
    I don't undestand, because, 0 factorial is 1, but using the formula we have other values!!!

  • @factsheet4930
    @factsheet4930 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    I challenge you to make cool solutions to the indeterminate form 0^i with limits!

  • @VSP4591
    @VSP4591 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Excelent

  • @EHTom
    @EHTom 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Can you use the squeeze theorem to find a value?

  • @RafaxDRufus
    @RafaxDRufus 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Steve, could you integrate sqrt(1+4x²)? I'd appreciate it so much

    • @kaszimidaczi
      @kaszimidaczi 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Set tan(u)=2x, then sec^2(u)du=2dx. After that you end up with half of the integral of sec^3(u). You can find the solution to that on his channel. Then use the fact that u=arctan(2x).

    • @RafaxDRufus
      @RafaxDRufus 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      kaszimidaczi Oh thank you! I haven't though it could be possible with tangent. Thanks :D

    • @igorzigmaker5785
      @igorzigmaker5785 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Simply set 2x = sh(u), then 2dx = ch(u) du, dx = ch(u)/2 du. Putting everything in your integral and knowing that 1 + sh^2(u) = ch^2(u) and ch(u) is always possible, you get ch(u) * ch(u)/2 du = 1/2 (ch(u))^2 du. After that use fact ch(u) = 1/2 (e^u + e^(-u)) and you'll get pretty simple integral with exponents.

    • @kaszimidaczi
      @kaszimidaczi 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Rafa xD No problem :)

    • @obinnanwakwue5735
      @obinnanwakwue5735 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      His name is Steve?!

  • @imtoouncreative8263
    @imtoouncreative8263 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    maybe the undefined negative factorials need new number systems like imaginary number system needed for negative roots

  • @adamkangoroo8475
    @adamkangoroo8475 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Maybe make the next video about the derivative of factorial?

    • @davidrheault7896
      @davidrheault7896 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Adam Kangoroo the derivative of the GAMMA function is called the digamma function and it is also meromorphic with the same poles

  • @alexmeanin8049
    @alexmeanin8049 ปีที่แล้ว

    Cooool!

  • @EHTom
    @EHTom 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Can u get a value of -1! If you get -.5! And the find -1.5! And find theoretical value that’s between those two?

    • @protasov-by
      @protasov-by 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      hey I looking for same though like sum of factorial solutions can be some factorial, then some summ of (-1/2)! can be put as solution to -1!. Have you find something?

  • @S1nwar
    @S1nwar 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    isnt it possible to invent a new type of complex number that satisfies 0*x = 1 ?

    • @alexwang982
      @alexwang982 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Derive math with it

    • @koskovictor5095
      @koskovictor5095 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      But the 0 powers follow separate rules as complex as calculous

    • @ashtonsmith1730
      @ashtonsmith1730 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Define j to be 1/0
      Then is 5*0*j eqaul to (5*0)j=1 or 5(0*j)=5?

  • @antoniusnies-komponistpian2172
    @antoniusnies-komponistpian2172 ปีที่แล้ว

    So the hard part is actually to calculate the factorials of the numbers between 0 and 1, then the rest is pretty easy to calculate.

  • @labidifaycal3185
    @labidifaycal3185 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    we can find a solution in hypercomplexe numbers.