Can we have negative factorial?

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 6 окт 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")

Комментарии • 407

  • @heliocentric1756
    @heliocentric1756 6 лет назад +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 лет назад +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 лет назад +9

      Are you argentinian?

    • @udayadityabhattacharyya7496
      @udayadityabhattacharyya7496 4 года назад +4

      @@Prxwler ttrrrryyyrfi

    • @mujahidrao7278
      @mujahidrao7278 2 года назад

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

  • @Jacob-uy8ox
    @Jacob-uy8ox 6 лет назад +256

    try to do a complex factorial

    • @SEBithehiper945
      @SEBithehiper945 8 месяцев назад +1

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

    • @Jeehd
      @Jeehd 3 месяца назад

      💀

    • @sgiri2012
      @sgiri2012 3 месяца назад

      ​@@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 лет назад +453

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

    • @alexwang982
      @alexwang982 5 лет назад +25

      R.
      1

    • @yosefmacgruber1920
      @yosefmacgruber1920 5 лет назад +22

      @@alexwang982
      Oh really? Then n! for n

    • @alexwang982
      @alexwang982 5 лет назад +12

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

    • @Fokalopoka
      @Fokalopoka 4 года назад +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 года назад +1

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

  • @ScottMaday
    @ScottMaday 5 лет назад +154

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

    • @arnavanand8037
      @arnavanand8037 5 лет назад +2

      You are too uneducated mathematically for this channel

    • @ham1533
      @ham1533 4 года назад +11

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

    • @chaoticstorm8145
      @chaoticstorm8145 4 года назад +6

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

    • @chaoticstorm8145
      @chaoticstorm8145 4 года назад +4

      @@arnavanand8037 get over yourself buddy

    • @sakuhoa
      @sakuhoa 3 года назад +3

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

  • @MichaelGrantPhD
    @MichaelGrantPhD 2 года назад +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 года назад +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 года назад

      @@GRBtutorials thank you!

  • @Filip6754
    @Filip6754 6 лет назад +279

    But can you do dis?

    • @PeterAuto1
      @PeterAuto1 6 лет назад +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 лет назад +1

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

    • @quarkonium3795
      @quarkonium3795 6 лет назад +9

      Peter Auto r/wooosh

    • @thenixaless7493
      @thenixaless7493 4 года назад +5

      Yes *Leans Chair Backwards*

    • @greenpewdiepie4207
      @greenpewdiepie4207 2 года назад

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

  • @factsheet4930
    @factsheet4930 6 лет назад +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 лет назад +63

    factOREO!

  • @michaelspence2508
    @michaelspence2508 5 лет назад +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 Год назад

      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 Год назад

      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 Год назад

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

    • @VenThusiaist
      @VenThusiaist Год назад

      @@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 Год назад +1

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

  • @sdsa007
    @sdsa007 2 года назад +5

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

  • @jorgeeduardopereztasso6134
    @jorgeeduardopereztasso6134 6 лет назад +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

  • @johi5951
    @johi5951 6 лет назад +56

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

  • @trueriver1950
    @trueriver1950 6 лет назад +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 лет назад

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

  • @nicholasleclerc1583
    @nicholasleclerc1583 6 лет назад +8

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

  • @flamingpaper7751
    @flamingpaper7751 6 лет назад +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 года назад +1

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

    • @wraithlordkoto
      @wraithlordkoto 2 года назад +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 года назад +2

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

    • @wraithlordkoto
      @wraithlordkoto 2 года назад +2

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

    • @The-Devils-Advocate
      @The-Devils-Advocate 2 года назад +1

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

  • @Mephisto707
    @Mephisto707 6 лет назад +24

    Can you show us the graph of the Pi function?

    • @MathNerdGamer
      @MathNerdGamer 6 лет назад +9

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

  • @blackpenredpen
    @blackpenredpen  6 лет назад +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 лет назад

      blackpenredpen so what's 0.5! ?

  • @Qoow8e1deDgikQ9m3ZG
    @Qoow8e1deDgikQ9m3ZG 5 лет назад +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)

  • @lill_m8
    @lill_m8 2 года назад +3

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

  • @odysseus9672
    @odysseus9672 Год назад

    (-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.

  • @ebz4125
    @ebz4125 6 лет назад +4

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

  • @igorzigmaker5785
    @igorzigmaker5785 6 лет назад +4

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

    • @blackpenredpen
      @blackpenredpen  6 лет назад

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

  • @veetaha
    @veetaha 6 лет назад +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?

  • @XESolar
    @XESolar 6 лет назад +38

    Complex factorials possible?

    • @davidrheault7896
      @davidrheault7896 6 лет назад +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 лет назад

      materiasacra

    • @davidrheault7896
      @davidrheault7896 6 лет назад

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

    • @dlevi67
      @dlevi67 6 лет назад +1

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

    • @alexwang982
      @alexwang982 5 лет назад

      reddit.com

  • @themsk9923
    @themsk9923 3 года назад +1

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

  • @atrumluminarium
    @atrumluminarium 6 лет назад

    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.

  • @Xnoob545
    @Xnoob545 6 лет назад +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 года назад

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

  • @joaomarcosdossantos7593
    @joaomarcosdossantos7593 6 лет назад +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 лет назад

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

  • @AbouTaim-Lille
    @AbouTaim-Lille 2 года назад

    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.

  • @tejing2001
    @tejing2001 5 лет назад +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.

  • @Cardgames4children
    @Cardgames4children 6 лет назад +57

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

    • @brandonklein1
      @brandonklein1 6 лет назад +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 лет назад +4

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

    • @tracyh5751
      @tracyh5751 6 лет назад +6

      gamma function also arises in statistics very naturally.

    • @CharlesPanigeo
      @CharlesPanigeo 5 лет назад

      @@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 месяцев назад +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.

  • @thepipe6397
    @thepipe6397 6 лет назад +18

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

  • @tomatrix7525
    @tomatrix7525 3 года назад

    Extremely nice vid bprp

  • @purim_sakamoto
    @purim_sakamoto 3 года назад +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

  • @NLproductions-xo2gq
    @NLproductions-xo2gq 2 месяца назад

    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

  • @elliottmanley5182
    @elliottmanley5182 6 лет назад

    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.

  • @Whateverbro24
    @Whateverbro24 6 лет назад +2

    Please do a video on complex numbers factorials

    • @blackpenredpen
      @blackpenredpen  6 лет назад +1

      I will try!

    • @yosefmacgruber1920
      @yosefmacgruber1920 5 лет назад

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

  • @MultiJoan09
    @MultiJoan09 5 лет назад +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

  • @peanut12345
    @peanut12345 5 лет назад +4

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

  • @MrRyanroberson1
    @MrRyanroberson1 6 лет назад

    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

  • @homer4590
    @homer4590 3 года назад

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

  • @iloveevermore13
    @iloveevermore13 2 года назад +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

  • @VSP4591
    @VSP4591 3 года назад

    Very ingenious. Congratulation.

  • @rakshithgowda1606
    @rakshithgowda1606 6 лет назад

    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.

  • @giladu.6551
    @giladu.6551 6 лет назад

    Keep doing what you're doing!

  • @randomviewer896
    @randomviewer896 2 года назад

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

    • @VenThusiaist
      @VenThusiaist Год назад

      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 -∞.

  • @billprovince8759
    @billprovince8759 6 лет назад +2

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

    • @dlevi67
      @dlevi67 6 лет назад +2

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

    • @billprovince8759
      @billprovince8759 6 лет назад +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 лет назад +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.

  • @ffggddss
    @ffggddss 4 года назад

    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

  • @НикитаБалк-ц5ъ
    @НикитаБалк-ц5ъ 5 лет назад +2

    15:58 i definitely heard "Ладно я шучу"

  • @happydmitry
    @happydmitry 6 лет назад +3

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

    • @Cjnw
      @Cjnw 5 лет назад

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

    • @yosefmacgruber1920
      @yosefmacgruber1920 5 лет назад

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

    • @Fokalopoka
      @Fokalopoka 4 года назад

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

    • @yosefmacgruber1920
      @yosefmacgruber1920 4 года назад

      @@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 года назад

      @@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 года назад +1

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

  • @chrisrybak4961
    @chrisrybak4961 2 года назад

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

  • @evyatarbaranga5624
    @evyatarbaranga5624 6 лет назад +21

    couldn't you just say that?
    (1/2)! = (1/2 -1)! *1/2 = (-1/2)!/2
    2*(1/2)! = (-1/2)!
    sqrt(PI) = (-1/2)!
    QED
    it still gets to the same answer

  • @ronitmandal7301
    @ronitmandal7301 6 лет назад +31

    But can you do this?!

  • @rifaturrahman5779
    @rifaturrahman5779 4 года назад +3

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

    • @pizzy1992
      @pizzy1992 4 года назад

      Eventi with that technic it doesn't converge

  • @mat_yt_7835
    @mat_yt_7835 3 года назад

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

  • @__fahim.__123
    @__fahim.__123 Год назад

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

  • @koskovictor5095
    @koskovictor5095 4 года назад

    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.

  • @meryemnour9996
    @meryemnour9996 3 года назад

    Thank you

  • @willpearson
    @willpearson Год назад

    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.

  • @TheLifeLaVita
    @TheLifeLaVita 6 лет назад

    (-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

  • @nutdanaiwongsomsak9162
    @nutdanaiwongsomsak9162 3 года назад

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

  • @seemajois3263
    @seemajois3263 6 лет назад +1

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

  • @williamwong03
    @williamwong03 6 лет назад

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

  • @zubiiiiii_
    @zubiiiiii_ 6 лет назад

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

  • @linknero1
    @linknero1 5 лет назад +1

    so which for negative numbers are indetermined the factorial function?

  • @General12th
    @General12th 6 лет назад

    Yay! This makes so much sense!

  • @haydenkarkainen1167
    @haydenkarkainen1167 6 лет назад

    Rip negative integers, thanks for the video!

  • @قرآنكريم-ش8ز3ص
    @قرآنكريم-ش8ز3ص 3 года назад

    Thank's very much

  • @bitcoinbuy
    @bitcoinbuy 2 года назад +6

    Kudos to those who understood this

  • @atharvaverma5013
    @atharvaverma5013 5 лет назад

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

  • @KannaKamui21000
    @KannaKamui21000 2 года назад

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

  • @VikasKumar-jz5mv
    @VikasKumar-jz5mv 5 лет назад +1

    Sir U r great,👍👍👍💥💥💥💥

  • @S1nwar
    @S1nwar 6 лет назад +1

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

    • @alexwang982
      @alexwang982 5 лет назад

      Derive math with it

    • @koskovictor5095
      @koskovictor5095 4 года назад

      But the 0 powers follow separate rules as complex as calculous

    • @ashtonsmith1730
      @ashtonsmith1730 4 года назад

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

  • @cosimobaldi03
    @cosimobaldi03 5 лет назад

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

  • @dragweb7725
    @dragweb7725 2 года назад

    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

  • @himanshumallick2269
    @himanshumallick2269 6 лет назад

    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 лет назад

      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)

  • @Sans-bd3bn
    @Sans-bd3bn 2 года назад

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

  • @factsheet4930
    @factsheet4930 6 лет назад

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

  • @paulchapman8023
    @paulchapman8023 4 года назад

    By the definition of a factorial, 0! = 0 * (-1)!
    By the null property of multiplication, 0 * n = 0, where n is any number that exists.
    Thus, either 0! = 0, or (-1)! does not exist.

  • @protasov-by
    @protasov-by 4 года назад

    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?

  • @adamkangoroo8475
    @adamkangoroo8475 6 лет назад

    Maybe make the next video about the derivative of factorial?

    • @davidrheault7896
      @davidrheault7896 6 лет назад

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

  • @andreamonteroso8586
    @andreamonteroso8586 4 года назад

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

  • @legendgames128
    @legendgames128 2 года назад

    Here's how I defined it: we can invent a new system of numbers. Let's call this j. 1j is the result of 1/0. By multiplying xj by 0, we get x by definition. We can't have a lonesome j and here's why: what is 0*j? Well 0*j could be viewed as 0*1j and that equals 1. On the other hand, 0*j could be 0j and that equals 0. Contradiction! So to continue the sequence, remember how -1! = 0!/0 = 1/0? Well that can be 1j. To continue, -1!/-1 = -1j, -2!/-2 = 1j/2, etc.

  • @RafaxDRufus
    @RafaxDRufus 6 лет назад +2

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

    • @kaszimidaczi
      @kaszimidaczi 6 лет назад +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 лет назад

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

    • @igorzigmaker5785
      @igorzigmaker5785 6 лет назад

      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 лет назад

      Rafa xD No problem :)

    • @obinnanwakwue5735
      @obinnanwakwue5735 6 лет назад

      His name is Steve?!

  • @madhavstalks3925
    @madhavstalks3925 6 лет назад

    Loved video

  • @thesardaunatv
    @thesardaunatv 4 года назад

    Thank you
    Mentor

  • @cicik57
    @cicik57 3 года назад

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

  • @antoniusnies-komponistpian2172

    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.

  • @rubikonium9484
    @rubikonium9484 2 года назад

    3:48 that voice crack though

  • @ARAVINDKUMAR-ug7gt
    @ARAVINDKUMAR-ug7gt 4 года назад

    Great sir

  • @leonardobarrera2816
    @leonardobarrera2816 Год назад

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

  • @pervezdar7340
    @pervezdar7340 4 года назад

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

  • @SledgerFromTDS.
    @SledgerFromTDS. 3 года назад +1

    Wait isn't Any Negative Factorials would result in a error

  • @EHTom
    @EHTom 6 лет назад

    Can you use the squeeze theorem to find a value?

  • @esolsen25
    @esolsen25 3 года назад +1

    how did you know I learned comparison tests in calc today what

  • @kamoroso94
    @kamoroso94 6 лет назад

    So what is the domain of the factorial function?

  • @josearita6440
    @josearita6440 6 лет назад

    Hello! Can you make a video explaining this optimization word problem? I would really appreciate it! Love your videos btw!
    A woman in a rowboat 3 miles from the nearest point on a straight shore line wishes to reach the dock which is 4 miles farther down the shore. If she can sail at a rate of 6 miles per hour and run at a rate of 4 miles per hour, how should she proceed in order to reach the dock in the shortest amount of time?
    I can't figure this out!
    Thanks

    • @AhsimNreiziev
      @AhsimNreiziev 6 лет назад +1

      Trick question. If she sails -- although _rowing_ would be more consistent with her stated mode of transportation -- faster than she runs, and the shortest path is only rowing, then obviously taking the shortest path is not only the path of least distance, but also the path of least time. Rowing the *sqrt((3^2) + (2 ^ 2)) = 5 miles* (by Pythagoras' Theorem) at *6 miles / hour* would take her 50 minutes. All other paths are slower than that.
      There is a much more interesting type of problem that's similar than this, but it only works if the speed in the water -- or whatever travel medium the starting point is in -- is actually _slower_ than the one on the sand (or whatever type of medium the end point is in). It also only works if the end point is _not_ on the line that is the transition from one medium to the other (the shore in this case). Instead, it must be at least marginally "land-inwards", so to speak
      If you're interested, watch this video by VSauce. ruclips.net/video/skvnj67YGmw/видео.html The whole thing is brilliant and I definitely recommend watching the whole thing, but the type of problem I was talking is given an example at around the 6:25 mark (or maybe a few seconds after that -- it's the one with the mud and the road).

  • @deidara_8598
    @deidara_8598 2 года назад

    Let's start with a nice definition of the factorial which can be applied to all integers.
    N! = N * (N-1)!, N>0
    We also define 1! = 1
    But that means 1! = 1*0!, so 0! = 1, same with all negative integers.
    (-1)! = 1
    Honestly it's whatever, a billion equally valid ways you could define the factorial function.

    • @stinkyhackboi4772
      @stinkyhackboi4772 2 года назад

      Isn't it like (-1)!=1(-2)!
      But we don't know the value of -2!
      So another way to define the function is
      (n-1)!=n!/n
      So -1!= 0!/0

  • @EHTom
    @EHTom 4 года назад +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 года назад

      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?