Reasoning about factorials: is this equation correct?











up vote
2
down vote

favorite
3












I was playing around with the möbius inversion formula and factorials and I came up with an equation that I found interesting:



$$prod_{ige2}leftlfloorfrac{x}{i}rightrfloor! = prod_{i ge 2}prod_{j ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{-mu(i)}$$



I'm not sure if this equation is valid.



Here is the reasoning:



(1) Let $text{lcm}(x) = $ the least common multiple of ${1, 2, 3, dots, x}$



(2) Using a well known equation:



$$x! = prod_{i ge 1}text{lcm}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{i}rightrfloorright)$$



(3) Using mobius inversion, I believe that this is now valid:



$$text{lcm}(x) = prod_{i ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{i}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



(4) Combining the two equations gets me to:



$$x! = prod_{j ge 1}prod_{i ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



(5) Since order of the products doesn't matter:



$$x! = prod_{i ge 1}prod_{j ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



(6) Since for $i=1,j=1$, $x! = left(frac{x}{ij}!right)^{mu(i)}$:



$$1 = prod_{i ge 1}prod_{j ge 1text{ and }jne1text{ if }i=1 }left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



(7) We can now use division to separate the remaining cases of $i=1$ so that we get:



$$prod_{j ge 2}leftlfloorfrac{x}{j}rightrfloor! = prod_{i ge 2}prod_{j ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{-mu(i)}$$



Is this equation correct? And if correct, is it well known?










share|cite|improve this question

















This question has an open bounty worth +50
reputation from Larry Freeman ending in 3 days.


Looking for an answer drawing from credible and/or official sources.


Would love to know if this is true and if it is true, if it is well known. If this is not valid, is there a similar equation for factorials? In other words, can this equation be corrected to become valid?




















    up vote
    2
    down vote

    favorite
    3












    I was playing around with the möbius inversion formula and factorials and I came up with an equation that I found interesting:



    $$prod_{ige2}leftlfloorfrac{x}{i}rightrfloor! = prod_{i ge 2}prod_{j ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{-mu(i)}$$



    I'm not sure if this equation is valid.



    Here is the reasoning:



    (1) Let $text{lcm}(x) = $ the least common multiple of ${1, 2, 3, dots, x}$



    (2) Using a well known equation:



    $$x! = prod_{i ge 1}text{lcm}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{i}rightrfloorright)$$



    (3) Using mobius inversion, I believe that this is now valid:



    $$text{lcm}(x) = prod_{i ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{i}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



    (4) Combining the two equations gets me to:



    $$x! = prod_{j ge 1}prod_{i ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



    (5) Since order of the products doesn't matter:



    $$x! = prod_{i ge 1}prod_{j ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



    (6) Since for $i=1,j=1$, $x! = left(frac{x}{ij}!right)^{mu(i)}$:



    $$1 = prod_{i ge 1}prod_{j ge 1text{ and }jne1text{ if }i=1 }left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



    (7) We can now use division to separate the remaining cases of $i=1$ so that we get:



    $$prod_{j ge 2}leftlfloorfrac{x}{j}rightrfloor! = prod_{i ge 2}prod_{j ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{-mu(i)}$$



    Is this equation correct? And if correct, is it well known?










    share|cite|improve this question

















    This question has an open bounty worth +50
    reputation from Larry Freeman ending in 3 days.


    Looking for an answer drawing from credible and/or official sources.


    Would love to know if this is true and if it is true, if it is well known. If this is not valid, is there a similar equation for factorials? In other words, can this equation be corrected to become valid?


















      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite
      3









      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite
      3






      3





      I was playing around with the möbius inversion formula and factorials and I came up with an equation that I found interesting:



      $$prod_{ige2}leftlfloorfrac{x}{i}rightrfloor! = prod_{i ge 2}prod_{j ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{-mu(i)}$$



      I'm not sure if this equation is valid.



      Here is the reasoning:



      (1) Let $text{lcm}(x) = $ the least common multiple of ${1, 2, 3, dots, x}$



      (2) Using a well known equation:



      $$x! = prod_{i ge 1}text{lcm}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{i}rightrfloorright)$$



      (3) Using mobius inversion, I believe that this is now valid:



      $$text{lcm}(x) = prod_{i ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{i}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



      (4) Combining the two equations gets me to:



      $$x! = prod_{j ge 1}prod_{i ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



      (5) Since order of the products doesn't matter:



      $$x! = prod_{i ge 1}prod_{j ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



      (6) Since for $i=1,j=1$, $x! = left(frac{x}{ij}!right)^{mu(i)}$:



      $$1 = prod_{i ge 1}prod_{j ge 1text{ and }jne1text{ if }i=1 }left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



      (7) We can now use division to separate the remaining cases of $i=1$ so that we get:



      $$prod_{j ge 2}leftlfloorfrac{x}{j}rightrfloor! = prod_{i ge 2}prod_{j ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{-mu(i)}$$



      Is this equation correct? And if correct, is it well known?










      share|cite|improve this question















      I was playing around with the möbius inversion formula and factorials and I came up with an equation that I found interesting:



      $$prod_{ige2}leftlfloorfrac{x}{i}rightrfloor! = prod_{i ge 2}prod_{j ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{-mu(i)}$$



      I'm not sure if this equation is valid.



      Here is the reasoning:



      (1) Let $text{lcm}(x) = $ the least common multiple of ${1, 2, 3, dots, x}$



      (2) Using a well known equation:



      $$x! = prod_{i ge 1}text{lcm}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{i}rightrfloorright)$$



      (3) Using mobius inversion, I believe that this is now valid:



      $$text{lcm}(x) = prod_{i ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{i}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



      (4) Combining the two equations gets me to:



      $$x! = prod_{j ge 1}prod_{i ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



      (5) Since order of the products doesn't matter:



      $$x! = prod_{i ge 1}prod_{j ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



      (6) Since for $i=1,j=1$, $x! = left(frac{x}{ij}!right)^{mu(i)}$:



      $$1 = prod_{i ge 1}prod_{j ge 1text{ and }jne1text{ if }i=1 }left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{mu(i)}$$



      (7) We can now use division to separate the remaining cases of $i=1$ so that we get:



      $$prod_{j ge 2}leftlfloorfrac{x}{j}rightrfloor! = prod_{i ge 2}prod_{j ge 1}left(leftlfloorfrac{x}{ij}rightrfloor!right)^{-mu(i)}$$



      Is this equation correct? And if correct, is it well known?







      proof-verification factorial least-common-multiple mobius-inversion






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Nov 10 at 18:06

























      asked Nov 10 at 17:59









      Larry Freeman

      3,23021239




      3,23021239






      This question has an open bounty worth +50
      reputation from Larry Freeman ending in 3 days.


      Looking for an answer drawing from credible and/or official sources.


      Would love to know if this is true and if it is true, if it is well known. If this is not valid, is there a similar equation for factorials? In other words, can this equation be corrected to become valid?








      This question has an open bounty worth +50
      reputation from Larry Freeman ending in 3 days.


      Looking for an answer drawing from credible and/or official sources.


      Would love to know if this is true and if it is true, if it is well known. If this is not valid, is there a similar equation for factorials? In other words, can this equation be corrected to become valid?





























          active

          oldest

          votes











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2992908%2freasoning-about-factorials-is-this-equation-correct%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown






























          active

          oldest

          votes













          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes
















           

          draft saved


          draft discarded



















































           


          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2992908%2freasoning-about-factorials-is-this-equation-correct%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Berounka

          Sphinx de Gizeh

          Different font size/position of beamer's navigation symbols template's content depending on regular/plain...