$frac{1}{15}<(frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdot cdot cdot cdotfrac{99}{100})<frac{1}{10}$.











up vote
5
down vote

favorite
2












Show that
$$frac{1}{15}<(frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdot cdot cdotcdotfrac{99}{100})<frac{1}{10}$$



My attempt:
This problem is from a text book where is introduced as: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalized_mean
This wouldn't be a problem if I knew the sum or a product of the given numbers. Then I will use AG inequality, but I don't know how.










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 3




    Related
    – Kemono Chen
    16 hours ago






  • 2




    But this question is still worth answering because there is a method showing $frac2{3sqrt n}<frac12cdotfrac34cdotsfrac{(2n-1)}{2n}<frac1{sqrt n}$ and it's not suitable for that question (unfortunately I forgot that) :(
    – Kemono Chen
    16 hours ago






  • 2




    @KemonoChen I think the correct inequality should be $$frac{2}{3sqrt{2n}}<frac12cdotfrac34cdotldotscdotfrac{2n-1}{2n}<frac{1}{sqrt{2n}},.$$ Otherwise, the left-hand side inequality is not even true for $n=1$ (and it is never true), while the right-hand side inequality is very weak.
    – Batominovski
    15 hours ago








  • 3




    $$frac{1}{4^n}binom{2n}{n}approx frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac{1}{4}right)}}.$$
    – Jack D'Aurizio
    11 hours ago








  • 2




    I found that $$frac{1}{sqrt{pi left(n+frac12right)}}<prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac{1}{sqrt{pi n}}$$ with @JackD'Aurizio's estimate being extremely close. For $n=50$, the required product is between $0.07939248$ and $0.07979788$, with Jack's estimate being $0.07958972$. The actual value is $0.07958923$.
    – Zvi
    11 hours ago

















up vote
5
down vote

favorite
2












Show that
$$frac{1}{15}<(frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdot cdot cdotcdotfrac{99}{100})<frac{1}{10}$$



My attempt:
This problem is from a text book where is introduced as: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalized_mean
This wouldn't be a problem if I knew the sum or a product of the given numbers. Then I will use AG inequality, but I don't know how.










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 3




    Related
    – Kemono Chen
    16 hours ago






  • 2




    But this question is still worth answering because there is a method showing $frac2{3sqrt n}<frac12cdotfrac34cdotsfrac{(2n-1)}{2n}<frac1{sqrt n}$ and it's not suitable for that question (unfortunately I forgot that) :(
    – Kemono Chen
    16 hours ago






  • 2




    @KemonoChen I think the correct inequality should be $$frac{2}{3sqrt{2n}}<frac12cdotfrac34cdotldotscdotfrac{2n-1}{2n}<frac{1}{sqrt{2n}},.$$ Otherwise, the left-hand side inequality is not even true for $n=1$ (and it is never true), while the right-hand side inequality is very weak.
    – Batominovski
    15 hours ago








  • 3




    $$frac{1}{4^n}binom{2n}{n}approx frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac{1}{4}right)}}.$$
    – Jack D'Aurizio
    11 hours ago








  • 2




    I found that $$frac{1}{sqrt{pi left(n+frac12right)}}<prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac{1}{sqrt{pi n}}$$ with @JackD'Aurizio's estimate being extremely close. For $n=50$, the required product is between $0.07939248$ and $0.07979788$, with Jack's estimate being $0.07958972$. The actual value is $0.07958923$.
    – Zvi
    11 hours ago















up vote
5
down vote

favorite
2









up vote
5
down vote

favorite
2






2





Show that
$$frac{1}{15}<(frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdot cdot cdotcdotfrac{99}{100})<frac{1}{10}$$



My attempt:
This problem is from a text book where is introduced as: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalized_mean
This wouldn't be a problem if I knew the sum or a product of the given numbers. Then I will use AG inequality, but I don't know how.










share|cite|improve this question















Show that
$$frac{1}{15}<(frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdot cdot cdotcdotfrac{99}{100})<frac{1}{10}$$



My attempt:
This problem is from a text book where is introduced as: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalized_mean
This wouldn't be a problem if I knew the sum or a product of the given numbers. Then I will use AG inequality, but I don't know how.







inequality






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 10 hours ago









dmtri

1,2261520




1,2261520










asked 16 hours ago









Lovro Sindičić

244216




244216








  • 3




    Related
    – Kemono Chen
    16 hours ago






  • 2




    But this question is still worth answering because there is a method showing $frac2{3sqrt n}<frac12cdotfrac34cdotsfrac{(2n-1)}{2n}<frac1{sqrt n}$ and it's not suitable for that question (unfortunately I forgot that) :(
    – Kemono Chen
    16 hours ago






  • 2




    @KemonoChen I think the correct inequality should be $$frac{2}{3sqrt{2n}}<frac12cdotfrac34cdotldotscdotfrac{2n-1}{2n}<frac{1}{sqrt{2n}},.$$ Otherwise, the left-hand side inequality is not even true for $n=1$ (and it is never true), while the right-hand side inequality is very weak.
    – Batominovski
    15 hours ago








  • 3




    $$frac{1}{4^n}binom{2n}{n}approx frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac{1}{4}right)}}.$$
    – Jack D'Aurizio
    11 hours ago








  • 2




    I found that $$frac{1}{sqrt{pi left(n+frac12right)}}<prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac{1}{sqrt{pi n}}$$ with @JackD'Aurizio's estimate being extremely close. For $n=50$, the required product is between $0.07939248$ and $0.07979788$, with Jack's estimate being $0.07958972$. The actual value is $0.07958923$.
    – Zvi
    11 hours ago
















  • 3




    Related
    – Kemono Chen
    16 hours ago






  • 2




    But this question is still worth answering because there is a method showing $frac2{3sqrt n}<frac12cdotfrac34cdotsfrac{(2n-1)}{2n}<frac1{sqrt n}$ and it's not suitable for that question (unfortunately I forgot that) :(
    – Kemono Chen
    16 hours ago






  • 2




    @KemonoChen I think the correct inequality should be $$frac{2}{3sqrt{2n}}<frac12cdotfrac34cdotldotscdotfrac{2n-1}{2n}<frac{1}{sqrt{2n}},.$$ Otherwise, the left-hand side inequality is not even true for $n=1$ (and it is never true), while the right-hand side inequality is very weak.
    – Batominovski
    15 hours ago








  • 3




    $$frac{1}{4^n}binom{2n}{n}approx frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac{1}{4}right)}}.$$
    – Jack D'Aurizio
    11 hours ago








  • 2




    I found that $$frac{1}{sqrt{pi left(n+frac12right)}}<prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac{1}{sqrt{pi n}}$$ with @JackD'Aurizio's estimate being extremely close. For $n=50$, the required product is between $0.07939248$ and $0.07979788$, with Jack's estimate being $0.07958972$. The actual value is $0.07958923$.
    – Zvi
    11 hours ago










3




3




Related
– Kemono Chen
16 hours ago




Related
– Kemono Chen
16 hours ago




2




2




But this question is still worth answering because there is a method showing $frac2{3sqrt n}<frac12cdotfrac34cdotsfrac{(2n-1)}{2n}<frac1{sqrt n}$ and it's not suitable for that question (unfortunately I forgot that) :(
– Kemono Chen
16 hours ago




But this question is still worth answering because there is a method showing $frac2{3sqrt n}<frac12cdotfrac34cdotsfrac{(2n-1)}{2n}<frac1{sqrt n}$ and it's not suitable for that question (unfortunately I forgot that) :(
– Kemono Chen
16 hours ago




2




2




@KemonoChen I think the correct inequality should be $$frac{2}{3sqrt{2n}}<frac12cdotfrac34cdotldotscdotfrac{2n-1}{2n}<frac{1}{sqrt{2n}},.$$ Otherwise, the left-hand side inequality is not even true for $n=1$ (and it is never true), while the right-hand side inequality is very weak.
– Batominovski
15 hours ago






@KemonoChen I think the correct inequality should be $$frac{2}{3sqrt{2n}}<frac12cdotfrac34cdotldotscdotfrac{2n-1}{2n}<frac{1}{sqrt{2n}},.$$ Otherwise, the left-hand side inequality is not even true for $n=1$ (and it is never true), while the right-hand side inequality is very weak.
– Batominovski
15 hours ago






3




3




$$frac{1}{4^n}binom{2n}{n}approx frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac{1}{4}right)}}.$$
– Jack D'Aurizio
11 hours ago






$$frac{1}{4^n}binom{2n}{n}approx frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac{1}{4}right)}}.$$
– Jack D'Aurizio
11 hours ago






2




2




I found that $$frac{1}{sqrt{pi left(n+frac12right)}}<prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac{1}{sqrt{pi n}}$$ with @JackD'Aurizio's estimate being extremely close. For $n=50$, the required product is between $0.07939248$ and $0.07979788$, with Jack's estimate being $0.07958972$. The actual value is $0.07958923$.
– Zvi
11 hours ago






I found that $$frac{1}{sqrt{pi left(n+frac12right)}}<prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac{1}{sqrt{pi n}}$$ with @JackD'Aurizio's estimate being extremely close. For $n=50$, the required product is between $0.07939248$ and $0.07979788$, with Jack's estimate being $0.07958972$. The actual value is $0.07958923$.
– Zvi
11 hours ago












5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
4
down vote













Let $a=frac{1}{2}.frac{3}{4}.frac{5}{6}. . . .frac{99}{100}$



and:



$b=frac{2}{3}.frac{4}{5}.frac{6}{7}. . . frac{100}{101}$



It is clear that $a<b$ because each factor of $a$ is less than its corresponding factor in $b$ :



$frac{1}{2}<frac{2}{3}, frac{3}{4}<frac{4}{5}. . . frac{99}{100}<frac{100}{101}$



$a^2 < ab=(frac{1}{2}.frac{2}{3}).(frac{3}{4}.frac{4}{5}). . . .(frac{99}{100}.frac{100}{101})=frac{1}{101}$



$a^2<frac{1}{101}$$a<frac{1}{sqrt{101}}<frac{1}{10}$



Also:



$2a<frac{3}{2}b$$2a^2<frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}.frac{3}{101}$$a^2 >frac{4}{9times 101}$$a>frac{1}{15}$






share|cite|improve this answer























  • I've lost count of how many times I've read the last line, and I still can't understand: (i) how you get $frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{3}{101}$, when surely it should be $frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{1}{101}$; (ii) how you get from $2a^2<frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{3}{101}$ to $a^2>frac{4}{9times101}$, when surely it should be $frac{1}{a^2}>frac{4times101}{9}$; or (iii) generally, how a lower bound for $a$ could possibly be obtained from an upper bound for $a$! (My reading comprehension sometimes goes on the blink, so, in view of the upvotes, I guess it must have happened again!)
    – Calum Gilhooley
    24 mins ago


















up vote
3
down vote













Let $P_n:=prodlimits_{k=1}^n,dfrac{2k-1}{2k}$ for each integer $ngeq 1$. We shall prove that $$frac{2}{3sqrt{2n}}<P_n<frac{1}{sqrt{2n}}tag{*}$$
for every positive integer $n$, as suggested by Kemono Chen (I think there should be a factor $dfrac{1}{sqrt{2}}$ there so that (*) implies the OP's inequality for $n=50$). The asymptotic behavior of $P_n$ is given here.



Observe that
$$P_n^2leq frac{1}{2^2},left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-1}{2k}right),left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k}{2k+1}right)=frac{1}{4},prod_{k=3}^{2n},frac{k}{k+1}=frac{3}{4(2n+1)}.$$
In addition,
$$P_n^2geq frac{1}{2^2},left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-1}{2k}right),left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-2}{2k-1}right)=frac{1}{4},prod_{k=2}^{2n-1},frac{k}{k+1}=frac{2}{4(2n)},.$$
This shows that
$$frac{1}{2,sqrt{n}}leq P_nleq frac{sqrt{3}}{2,sqrt{2n+1}},.$$
Both the inequality on the right and the inequality on the left have a unique equality case: $n=1$. Note that this implies (*). In particular, for $n=50$, we have
$$frac{1}{15}<0.0707<frac{1}{2cdotsqrt{50}}<P_{50}<frac{sqrt{3}}{2cdot sqrt{101}}<0.0862<frac{1}{10},.$$






share|cite|improve this answer






























    up vote
    2
    down vote













    Let $S_n=prod_{k=1}^nfrac{2k-1}{2k}$. From Wallis' product, we have
    $$prod_{k=1}^inftyleft(frac{2k}{2k-1}cdotfrac{2k}{2k+1}right)=frac{pi}{2}.$$
    Since each term in the product above is greater than $1$, this shows that
    $$prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k}{2k-1}cdotfrac{2k}{2k+1}right)<frac{pi}{2}$$
    for all $n$. That is,
    $$(2n+1)S_n^2=(2n+1)prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)^2=prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}cdotfrac{2k+1}{2k}right)>frac{2}{pi}.$$
    Therefore,
    $$S_n>frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac12right)}}.$$



    Similarly, Wallis' product also implies that
    $$prod_{k=2}^inftyleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)=frac{4}{pi}.$$
    Since each term in the product above is greater than $1$, this shows that
    $$prod_{k=2}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac{4}{pi}$$
    for all $n$. That is,
    $$2nS_n^2=2nprod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)^2=frac12prod_{k=2}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac12left(frac{4}{pi}right).$$
    Therefore,
    $$S_n<frac{1}{sqrt{pi n}}.$$ Hence,
    $$frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac12right)}}<S_n<frac1{sqrt{pi n}}$$
    for every $n$.



    enter image description here



    enter image description here






    share|cite|improve this answer






























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      Just a thought, that may be worth mentioning:



      The expression:



      $$p=(frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdot cdot cdotcdotfrac{99}{100})$$



      We could use the following identities:



      Product of $n$ odd numbers =



      $$p_o = frac{(2n!)}{(n!)2^{n}}$$



      Product of $n$ even numbers =



      $$p_e = (n!)2^{n}$$



      The first $4$ terms of $p$ =



      $$frac{1.3.5.7}{2.4.6.8}=frac{105}{1152}=0.2734$$



      We may write $p$ as:



      $$p=frac{odd_numbers}{even_numbers}=frac{p_o}{p_e}=$$



      $$p=frac{(2n)!}{((n!)2^{n})^2}$$



      To prove $p<frac{1}{10}$, we know that (2n)! < n! (for n>1), so we can write:



      $$p<frac{(n!)}{((n!)2^{n})^2}$$



      $$p<frac{1}{(n!)({n})^2}$$



      We could conclude that, for $n >=2$



      $$p<frac{1}{10}$$



      for the lower bound, any of the other solution presented may be considered or check stovf-math p between 1/13 and 1/15 may also be considered.






      share|cite|improve this answer






























        up vote
        0
        down vote













        This is tedious and unsophisticated, but don't knock it, it works! :)



        As well as answering the present question, it also answers the linked question, prove $frac{1}{13}<frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdotsfrac{99}{100}<frac{1}{12}$.



        We need a preliminary lemma:




        If
        $$
        k = left(1 - frac{1}{52^2}right)left(1 - frac{1}{56^2}right)cdotsleft(1 - frac{1}{96^2}right),
        $$

        then
        $$
        frac{383}{384} < k < frac{1300}{1303}.
        $$

        Rounding up and down, as appropriate, this is approximately
        $$
        0.997395 < k < 0.997698,
        $$

        but of course we avoid using such calculations.




        Proof. By the Weierstrass product inequality, we have
        $$
        1 - s < k < frac{1}{1 + s},
        $$

        where
        $$
        s = frac{1}{52^2} + frac{1}{56^2} + cdots + frac{1}{96^2} =
        frac{1}{16}left(frac{1}{13^2} + frac{1}{14^2} + cdots + frac{1}{24^2}right).
        $$

        Telescoping,
        $$
        frac{12}{325} =
        frac{1}{13cdot14} + frac{1}{14cdot15} + cdots + frac{1}{24cdot25}
        < 16s <
        frac{1}{12cdot13} + frac{1}{13cdot14} + cdots + frac{1}{23cdot24}
        = frac{1}{24},
        $$

        therefore
        $$
        1 - frac{1}{384} < k < frac{1}{1 + frac{3}{1300}},
        $$

        as required. $square$



        The number we wish to approximate is
        $$
        P = frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdotsfrac{99}{100}
        = frac{51cdot53cdot55cdots97cdot99}{2^{25}cdot4cdot8cdot12cdots96cdot100}
        = kQ,
        $$

        where
        begin{gather*}
        Q = frac{52^2cdot56^2cdots96^2cdot99}{2^{75}cdot25!}
        = frac{13cdot14cdots24cdot99}{2^{27}cdot12!cdot25}
        = frac{13cdot15cdot17cdot19cdot21cdot23cdot99}{2^{21}cdot6!cdot25} \
        = frac{7cdot13cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot99}{2^{25}cdot25}.
        end{gather*}

        Therefore, using the bounds obtained for $k$ in the lemma,
        begin{equation}
        tag{$1$}label{ineq:1}
        frac{7cdot13cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot33cdot383}{2^{32}cdot25}
        < P <
        frac{7cdot13^2cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot99}{2^{23}cdot1303}.
        end{equation}

        Although this is well within the range of easy hand calculation, I lazily used a calculator for most of the work (only doubling $2^{22}cdot1303 = 5{,}465{,}178{,}112$ at the last stage by hand), to get
        begin{equation}
        tag{$2$}label{ineq:2}
        frac{8{,}544{,}456{,}921}{107{,}374{,}182{,}400} < P < frac{870{,}062{,}193}{10{,}930{,}356{,}224},
        end{equation}

        or approximately
        $$
        0.079576 < P < 0.079601.
        $$

        One way to "simplify" eqref{ineq:1} (although it seems simpler to me to calculate eqref{ineq:2} and be done with it!) is as follows:



        For the upper bound, observe that $7cdot13cdot19 = 1729 = 1 + 12^3$ (famously!), and $1302 = 2cdot3cdot7cdot31$, so
        $$
        frac{7cdot13cdot19}{1303} < frac{1728}{2cdot3cdot7cdot31} = frac{288}{217} < frac{288}{216} = frac{4}{3},
        $$

        (as one can now easily verify with hindsight), therefore
        $$
        P < frac{13cdot17cdot23cdot99}{2^{21}cdot3} < frac{17cdot300cdot100}{2^{11}cdot3cdot1000} = frac{85}{1024} < frac{1}{12}.
        $$



        For the lower bound, first simplify $Q$ by noticing that $7cdot17cdot19cdot23 = 52003 > 52000 = 2^5cdot5^3cdot13$, whence
        $$
        Q > frac{5cdot13^2cdot99}{2^{20}} = frac{5cdot13cdot1287}{2^{20}} > frac{5cdot13cdot1280}{2^{20}} = frac{5^2cdot13}{2^{12}},
        $$

        and then, instead of using the lower bound from the lemma directly, weaken it to $P > frac{64}{65}Q$, which gives
        $$
        P > frac{5}{64} > frac{1}{13}.
        $$






        share|cite|improve this answer





















          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%2f3004689%2ffrac115-frac12-cdot-frac34-cdot-frac56-cdot-cdot-cdot-cdo%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          5 Answers
          5






          active

          oldest

          votes








          5 Answers
          5






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          4
          down vote













          Let $a=frac{1}{2}.frac{3}{4}.frac{5}{6}. . . .frac{99}{100}$



          and:



          $b=frac{2}{3}.frac{4}{5}.frac{6}{7}. . . frac{100}{101}$



          It is clear that $a<b$ because each factor of $a$ is less than its corresponding factor in $b$ :



          $frac{1}{2}<frac{2}{3}, frac{3}{4}<frac{4}{5}. . . frac{99}{100}<frac{100}{101}$



          $a^2 < ab=(frac{1}{2}.frac{2}{3}).(frac{3}{4}.frac{4}{5}). . . .(frac{99}{100}.frac{100}{101})=frac{1}{101}$



          $a^2<frac{1}{101}$$a<frac{1}{sqrt{101}}<frac{1}{10}$



          Also:



          $2a<frac{3}{2}b$$2a^2<frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}.frac{3}{101}$$a^2 >frac{4}{9times 101}$$a>frac{1}{15}$






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • I've lost count of how many times I've read the last line, and I still can't understand: (i) how you get $frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{3}{101}$, when surely it should be $frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{1}{101}$; (ii) how you get from $2a^2<frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{3}{101}$ to $a^2>frac{4}{9times101}$, when surely it should be $frac{1}{a^2}>frac{4times101}{9}$; or (iii) generally, how a lower bound for $a$ could possibly be obtained from an upper bound for $a$! (My reading comprehension sometimes goes on the blink, so, in view of the upvotes, I guess it must have happened again!)
            – Calum Gilhooley
            24 mins ago















          up vote
          4
          down vote













          Let $a=frac{1}{2}.frac{3}{4}.frac{5}{6}. . . .frac{99}{100}$



          and:



          $b=frac{2}{3}.frac{4}{5}.frac{6}{7}. . . frac{100}{101}$



          It is clear that $a<b$ because each factor of $a$ is less than its corresponding factor in $b$ :



          $frac{1}{2}<frac{2}{3}, frac{3}{4}<frac{4}{5}. . . frac{99}{100}<frac{100}{101}$



          $a^2 < ab=(frac{1}{2}.frac{2}{3}).(frac{3}{4}.frac{4}{5}). . . .(frac{99}{100}.frac{100}{101})=frac{1}{101}$



          $a^2<frac{1}{101}$$a<frac{1}{sqrt{101}}<frac{1}{10}$



          Also:



          $2a<frac{3}{2}b$$2a^2<frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}.frac{3}{101}$$a^2 >frac{4}{9times 101}$$a>frac{1}{15}$






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • I've lost count of how many times I've read the last line, and I still can't understand: (i) how you get $frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{3}{101}$, when surely it should be $frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{1}{101}$; (ii) how you get from $2a^2<frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{3}{101}$ to $a^2>frac{4}{9times101}$, when surely it should be $frac{1}{a^2}>frac{4times101}{9}$; or (iii) generally, how a lower bound for $a$ could possibly be obtained from an upper bound for $a$! (My reading comprehension sometimes goes on the blink, so, in view of the upvotes, I guess it must have happened again!)
            – Calum Gilhooley
            24 mins ago













          up vote
          4
          down vote










          up vote
          4
          down vote









          Let $a=frac{1}{2}.frac{3}{4}.frac{5}{6}. . . .frac{99}{100}$



          and:



          $b=frac{2}{3}.frac{4}{5}.frac{6}{7}. . . frac{100}{101}$



          It is clear that $a<b$ because each factor of $a$ is less than its corresponding factor in $b$ :



          $frac{1}{2}<frac{2}{3}, frac{3}{4}<frac{4}{5}. . . frac{99}{100}<frac{100}{101}$



          $a^2 < ab=(frac{1}{2}.frac{2}{3}).(frac{3}{4}.frac{4}{5}). . . .(frac{99}{100}.frac{100}{101})=frac{1}{101}$



          $a^2<frac{1}{101}$$a<frac{1}{sqrt{101}}<frac{1}{10}$



          Also:



          $2a<frac{3}{2}b$$2a^2<frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}.frac{3}{101}$$a^2 >frac{4}{9times 101}$$a>frac{1}{15}$






          share|cite|improve this answer














          Let $a=frac{1}{2}.frac{3}{4}.frac{5}{6}. . . .frac{99}{100}$



          and:



          $b=frac{2}{3}.frac{4}{5}.frac{6}{7}. . . frac{100}{101}$



          It is clear that $a<b$ because each factor of $a$ is less than its corresponding factor in $b$ :



          $frac{1}{2}<frac{2}{3}, frac{3}{4}<frac{4}{5}. . . frac{99}{100}<frac{100}{101}$



          $a^2 < ab=(frac{1}{2}.frac{2}{3}).(frac{3}{4}.frac{4}{5}). . . .(frac{99}{100}.frac{100}{101})=frac{1}{101}$



          $a^2<frac{1}{101}$$a<frac{1}{sqrt{101}}<frac{1}{10}$



          Also:



          $2a<frac{3}{2}b$$2a^2<frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}.frac{3}{101}$$a^2 >frac{4}{9times 101}$$a>frac{1}{15}$







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited 10 hours ago









          dmtri

          1,2261520




          1,2261520










          answered 12 hours ago









          sirous

          1,5371513




          1,5371513












          • I've lost count of how many times I've read the last line, and I still can't understand: (i) how you get $frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{3}{101}$, when surely it should be $frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{1}{101}$; (ii) how you get from $2a^2<frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{3}{101}$ to $a^2>frac{4}{9times101}$, when surely it should be $frac{1}{a^2}>frac{4times101}{9}$; or (iii) generally, how a lower bound for $a$ could possibly be obtained from an upper bound for $a$! (My reading comprehension sometimes goes on the blink, so, in view of the upvotes, I guess it must have happened again!)
            – Calum Gilhooley
            24 mins ago


















          • I've lost count of how many times I've read the last line, and I still can't understand: (i) how you get $frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{3}{101}$, when surely it should be $frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{1}{101}$; (ii) how you get from $2a^2<frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{3}{101}$ to $a^2>frac{4}{9times101}$, when surely it should be $frac{1}{a^2}>frac{4times101}{9}$; or (iii) generally, how a lower bound for $a$ could possibly be obtained from an upper bound for $a$! (My reading comprehension sometimes goes on the blink, so, in view of the upvotes, I guess it must have happened again!)
            – Calum Gilhooley
            24 mins ago
















          I've lost count of how many times I've read the last line, and I still can't understand: (i) how you get $frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{3}{101}$, when surely it should be $frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{1}{101}$; (ii) how you get from $2a^2<frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{3}{101}$ to $a^2>frac{4}{9times101}$, when surely it should be $frac{1}{a^2}>frac{4times101}{9}$; or (iii) generally, how a lower bound for $a$ could possibly be obtained from an upper bound for $a$! (My reading comprehension sometimes goes on the blink, so, in view of the upvotes, I guess it must have happened again!)
          – Calum Gilhooley
          24 mins ago




          I've lost count of how many times I've read the last line, and I still can't understand: (i) how you get $frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{3}{101}$, when surely it should be $frac{3}{2}ab=frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{1}{101}$; (ii) how you get from $2a^2<frac{3}{2}cdotfrac{3}{101}$ to $a^2>frac{4}{9times101}$, when surely it should be $frac{1}{a^2}>frac{4times101}{9}$; or (iii) generally, how a lower bound for $a$ could possibly be obtained from an upper bound for $a$! (My reading comprehension sometimes goes on the blink, so, in view of the upvotes, I guess it must have happened again!)
          – Calum Gilhooley
          24 mins ago










          up vote
          3
          down vote













          Let $P_n:=prodlimits_{k=1}^n,dfrac{2k-1}{2k}$ for each integer $ngeq 1$. We shall prove that $$frac{2}{3sqrt{2n}}<P_n<frac{1}{sqrt{2n}}tag{*}$$
          for every positive integer $n$, as suggested by Kemono Chen (I think there should be a factor $dfrac{1}{sqrt{2}}$ there so that (*) implies the OP's inequality for $n=50$). The asymptotic behavior of $P_n$ is given here.



          Observe that
          $$P_n^2leq frac{1}{2^2},left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-1}{2k}right),left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k}{2k+1}right)=frac{1}{4},prod_{k=3}^{2n},frac{k}{k+1}=frac{3}{4(2n+1)}.$$
          In addition,
          $$P_n^2geq frac{1}{2^2},left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-1}{2k}right),left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-2}{2k-1}right)=frac{1}{4},prod_{k=2}^{2n-1},frac{k}{k+1}=frac{2}{4(2n)},.$$
          This shows that
          $$frac{1}{2,sqrt{n}}leq P_nleq frac{sqrt{3}}{2,sqrt{2n+1}},.$$
          Both the inequality on the right and the inequality on the left have a unique equality case: $n=1$. Note that this implies (*). In particular, for $n=50$, we have
          $$frac{1}{15}<0.0707<frac{1}{2cdotsqrt{50}}<P_{50}<frac{sqrt{3}}{2cdot sqrt{101}}<0.0862<frac{1}{10},.$$






          share|cite|improve this answer



























            up vote
            3
            down vote













            Let $P_n:=prodlimits_{k=1}^n,dfrac{2k-1}{2k}$ for each integer $ngeq 1$. We shall prove that $$frac{2}{3sqrt{2n}}<P_n<frac{1}{sqrt{2n}}tag{*}$$
            for every positive integer $n$, as suggested by Kemono Chen (I think there should be a factor $dfrac{1}{sqrt{2}}$ there so that (*) implies the OP's inequality for $n=50$). The asymptotic behavior of $P_n$ is given here.



            Observe that
            $$P_n^2leq frac{1}{2^2},left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-1}{2k}right),left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k}{2k+1}right)=frac{1}{4},prod_{k=3}^{2n},frac{k}{k+1}=frac{3}{4(2n+1)}.$$
            In addition,
            $$P_n^2geq frac{1}{2^2},left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-1}{2k}right),left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-2}{2k-1}right)=frac{1}{4},prod_{k=2}^{2n-1},frac{k}{k+1}=frac{2}{4(2n)},.$$
            This shows that
            $$frac{1}{2,sqrt{n}}leq P_nleq frac{sqrt{3}}{2,sqrt{2n+1}},.$$
            Both the inequality on the right and the inequality on the left have a unique equality case: $n=1$. Note that this implies (*). In particular, for $n=50$, we have
            $$frac{1}{15}<0.0707<frac{1}{2cdotsqrt{50}}<P_{50}<frac{sqrt{3}}{2cdot sqrt{101}}<0.0862<frac{1}{10},.$$






            share|cite|improve this answer

























              up vote
              3
              down vote










              up vote
              3
              down vote









              Let $P_n:=prodlimits_{k=1}^n,dfrac{2k-1}{2k}$ for each integer $ngeq 1$. We shall prove that $$frac{2}{3sqrt{2n}}<P_n<frac{1}{sqrt{2n}}tag{*}$$
              for every positive integer $n$, as suggested by Kemono Chen (I think there should be a factor $dfrac{1}{sqrt{2}}$ there so that (*) implies the OP's inequality for $n=50$). The asymptotic behavior of $P_n$ is given here.



              Observe that
              $$P_n^2leq frac{1}{2^2},left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-1}{2k}right),left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k}{2k+1}right)=frac{1}{4},prod_{k=3}^{2n},frac{k}{k+1}=frac{3}{4(2n+1)}.$$
              In addition,
              $$P_n^2geq frac{1}{2^2},left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-1}{2k}right),left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-2}{2k-1}right)=frac{1}{4},prod_{k=2}^{2n-1},frac{k}{k+1}=frac{2}{4(2n)},.$$
              This shows that
              $$frac{1}{2,sqrt{n}}leq P_nleq frac{sqrt{3}}{2,sqrt{2n+1}},.$$
              Both the inequality on the right and the inequality on the left have a unique equality case: $n=1$. Note that this implies (*). In particular, for $n=50$, we have
              $$frac{1}{15}<0.0707<frac{1}{2cdotsqrt{50}}<P_{50}<frac{sqrt{3}}{2cdot sqrt{101}}<0.0862<frac{1}{10},.$$






              share|cite|improve this answer














              Let $P_n:=prodlimits_{k=1}^n,dfrac{2k-1}{2k}$ for each integer $ngeq 1$. We shall prove that $$frac{2}{3sqrt{2n}}<P_n<frac{1}{sqrt{2n}}tag{*}$$
              for every positive integer $n$, as suggested by Kemono Chen (I think there should be a factor $dfrac{1}{sqrt{2}}$ there so that (*) implies the OP's inequality for $n=50$). The asymptotic behavior of $P_n$ is given here.



              Observe that
              $$P_n^2leq frac{1}{2^2},left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-1}{2k}right),left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k}{2k+1}right)=frac{1}{4},prod_{k=3}^{2n},frac{k}{k+1}=frac{3}{4(2n+1)}.$$
              In addition,
              $$P_n^2geq frac{1}{2^2},left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-1}{2k}right),left(prod_{k=2}^n,frac{2k-2}{2k-1}right)=frac{1}{4},prod_{k=2}^{2n-1},frac{k}{k+1}=frac{2}{4(2n)},.$$
              This shows that
              $$frac{1}{2,sqrt{n}}leq P_nleq frac{sqrt{3}}{2,sqrt{2n+1}},.$$
              Both the inequality on the right and the inequality on the left have a unique equality case: $n=1$. Note that this implies (*). In particular, for $n=50$, we have
              $$frac{1}{15}<0.0707<frac{1}{2cdotsqrt{50}}<P_{50}<frac{sqrt{3}}{2cdot sqrt{101}}<0.0862<frac{1}{10},.$$







              share|cite|improve this answer














              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer








              edited 11 hours ago

























              answered 15 hours ago









              Batominovski

              31.1k23187




              31.1k23187






















                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote













                  Let $S_n=prod_{k=1}^nfrac{2k-1}{2k}$. From Wallis' product, we have
                  $$prod_{k=1}^inftyleft(frac{2k}{2k-1}cdotfrac{2k}{2k+1}right)=frac{pi}{2}.$$
                  Since each term in the product above is greater than $1$, this shows that
                  $$prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k}{2k-1}cdotfrac{2k}{2k+1}right)<frac{pi}{2}$$
                  for all $n$. That is,
                  $$(2n+1)S_n^2=(2n+1)prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)^2=prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}cdotfrac{2k+1}{2k}right)>frac{2}{pi}.$$
                  Therefore,
                  $$S_n>frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac12right)}}.$$



                  Similarly, Wallis' product also implies that
                  $$prod_{k=2}^inftyleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)=frac{4}{pi}.$$
                  Since each term in the product above is greater than $1$, this shows that
                  $$prod_{k=2}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac{4}{pi}$$
                  for all $n$. That is,
                  $$2nS_n^2=2nprod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)^2=frac12prod_{k=2}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac12left(frac{4}{pi}right).$$
                  Therefore,
                  $$S_n<frac{1}{sqrt{pi n}}.$$ Hence,
                  $$frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac12right)}}<S_n<frac1{sqrt{pi n}}$$
                  for every $n$.



                  enter image description here



                  enter image description here






                  share|cite|improve this answer



























                    up vote
                    2
                    down vote













                    Let $S_n=prod_{k=1}^nfrac{2k-1}{2k}$. From Wallis' product, we have
                    $$prod_{k=1}^inftyleft(frac{2k}{2k-1}cdotfrac{2k}{2k+1}right)=frac{pi}{2}.$$
                    Since each term in the product above is greater than $1$, this shows that
                    $$prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k}{2k-1}cdotfrac{2k}{2k+1}right)<frac{pi}{2}$$
                    for all $n$. That is,
                    $$(2n+1)S_n^2=(2n+1)prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)^2=prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}cdotfrac{2k+1}{2k}right)>frac{2}{pi}.$$
                    Therefore,
                    $$S_n>frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac12right)}}.$$



                    Similarly, Wallis' product also implies that
                    $$prod_{k=2}^inftyleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)=frac{4}{pi}.$$
                    Since each term in the product above is greater than $1$, this shows that
                    $$prod_{k=2}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac{4}{pi}$$
                    for all $n$. That is,
                    $$2nS_n^2=2nprod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)^2=frac12prod_{k=2}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac12left(frac{4}{pi}right).$$
                    Therefore,
                    $$S_n<frac{1}{sqrt{pi n}}.$$ Hence,
                    $$frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac12right)}}<S_n<frac1{sqrt{pi n}}$$
                    for every $n$.



                    enter image description here



                    enter image description here






                    share|cite|improve this answer

























                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote









                      Let $S_n=prod_{k=1}^nfrac{2k-1}{2k}$. From Wallis' product, we have
                      $$prod_{k=1}^inftyleft(frac{2k}{2k-1}cdotfrac{2k}{2k+1}right)=frac{pi}{2}.$$
                      Since each term in the product above is greater than $1$, this shows that
                      $$prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k}{2k-1}cdotfrac{2k}{2k+1}right)<frac{pi}{2}$$
                      for all $n$. That is,
                      $$(2n+1)S_n^2=(2n+1)prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)^2=prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}cdotfrac{2k+1}{2k}right)>frac{2}{pi}.$$
                      Therefore,
                      $$S_n>frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac12right)}}.$$



                      Similarly, Wallis' product also implies that
                      $$prod_{k=2}^inftyleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)=frac{4}{pi}.$$
                      Since each term in the product above is greater than $1$, this shows that
                      $$prod_{k=2}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac{4}{pi}$$
                      for all $n$. That is,
                      $$2nS_n^2=2nprod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)^2=frac12prod_{k=2}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac12left(frac{4}{pi}right).$$
                      Therefore,
                      $$S_n<frac{1}{sqrt{pi n}}.$$ Hence,
                      $$frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac12right)}}<S_n<frac1{sqrt{pi n}}$$
                      for every $n$.



                      enter image description here



                      enter image description here






                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      Let $S_n=prod_{k=1}^nfrac{2k-1}{2k}$. From Wallis' product, we have
                      $$prod_{k=1}^inftyleft(frac{2k}{2k-1}cdotfrac{2k}{2k+1}right)=frac{pi}{2}.$$
                      Since each term in the product above is greater than $1$, this shows that
                      $$prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k}{2k-1}cdotfrac{2k}{2k+1}right)<frac{pi}{2}$$
                      for all $n$. That is,
                      $$(2n+1)S_n^2=(2n+1)prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)^2=prod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}cdotfrac{2k+1}{2k}right)>frac{2}{pi}.$$
                      Therefore,
                      $$S_n>frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac12right)}}.$$



                      Similarly, Wallis' product also implies that
                      $$prod_{k=2}^inftyleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)=frac{4}{pi}.$$
                      Since each term in the product above is greater than $1$, this shows that
                      $$prod_{k=2}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac{4}{pi}$$
                      for all $n$. That is,
                      $$2nS_n^2=2nprod_{k=1}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k}right)^2=frac12prod_{k=2}^nleft(frac{2k-1}{2k-2}cdotfrac{2k-1}{2k}right)<frac12left(frac{4}{pi}right).$$
                      Therefore,
                      $$S_n<frac{1}{sqrt{pi n}}.$$ Hence,
                      $$frac{1}{sqrt{pileft(n+frac12right)}}<S_n<frac1{sqrt{pi n}}$$
                      for every $n$.



                      enter image description here



                      enter image description here







                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer








                      edited 9 hours ago

























                      answered 10 hours ago









                      Zvi

                      3,165221




                      3,165221






















                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote













                          Just a thought, that may be worth mentioning:



                          The expression:



                          $$p=(frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdot cdot cdotcdotfrac{99}{100})$$



                          We could use the following identities:



                          Product of $n$ odd numbers =



                          $$p_o = frac{(2n!)}{(n!)2^{n}}$$



                          Product of $n$ even numbers =



                          $$p_e = (n!)2^{n}$$



                          The first $4$ terms of $p$ =



                          $$frac{1.3.5.7}{2.4.6.8}=frac{105}{1152}=0.2734$$



                          We may write $p$ as:



                          $$p=frac{odd_numbers}{even_numbers}=frac{p_o}{p_e}=$$



                          $$p=frac{(2n)!}{((n!)2^{n})^2}$$



                          To prove $p<frac{1}{10}$, we know that (2n)! < n! (for n>1), so we can write:



                          $$p<frac{(n!)}{((n!)2^{n})^2}$$



                          $$p<frac{1}{(n!)({n})^2}$$



                          We could conclude that, for $n >=2$



                          $$p<frac{1}{10}$$



                          for the lower bound, any of the other solution presented may be considered or check stovf-math p between 1/13 and 1/15 may also be considered.






                          share|cite|improve this answer



























                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote













                            Just a thought, that may be worth mentioning:



                            The expression:



                            $$p=(frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdot cdot cdotcdotfrac{99}{100})$$



                            We could use the following identities:



                            Product of $n$ odd numbers =



                            $$p_o = frac{(2n!)}{(n!)2^{n}}$$



                            Product of $n$ even numbers =



                            $$p_e = (n!)2^{n}$$



                            The first $4$ terms of $p$ =



                            $$frac{1.3.5.7}{2.4.6.8}=frac{105}{1152}=0.2734$$



                            We may write $p$ as:



                            $$p=frac{odd_numbers}{even_numbers}=frac{p_o}{p_e}=$$



                            $$p=frac{(2n)!}{((n!)2^{n})^2}$$



                            To prove $p<frac{1}{10}$, we know that (2n)! < n! (for n>1), so we can write:



                            $$p<frac{(n!)}{((n!)2^{n})^2}$$



                            $$p<frac{1}{(n!)({n})^2}$$



                            We could conclude that, for $n >=2$



                            $$p<frac{1}{10}$$



                            for the lower bound, any of the other solution presented may be considered or check stovf-math p between 1/13 and 1/15 may also be considered.






                            share|cite|improve this answer

























                              up vote
                              0
                              down vote










                              up vote
                              0
                              down vote









                              Just a thought, that may be worth mentioning:



                              The expression:



                              $$p=(frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdot cdot cdotcdotfrac{99}{100})$$



                              We could use the following identities:



                              Product of $n$ odd numbers =



                              $$p_o = frac{(2n!)}{(n!)2^{n}}$$



                              Product of $n$ even numbers =



                              $$p_e = (n!)2^{n}$$



                              The first $4$ terms of $p$ =



                              $$frac{1.3.5.7}{2.4.6.8}=frac{105}{1152}=0.2734$$



                              We may write $p$ as:



                              $$p=frac{odd_numbers}{even_numbers}=frac{p_o}{p_e}=$$



                              $$p=frac{(2n)!}{((n!)2^{n})^2}$$



                              To prove $p<frac{1}{10}$, we know that (2n)! < n! (for n>1), so we can write:



                              $$p<frac{(n!)}{((n!)2^{n})^2}$$



                              $$p<frac{1}{(n!)({n})^2}$$



                              We could conclude that, for $n >=2$



                              $$p<frac{1}{10}$$



                              for the lower bound, any of the other solution presented may be considered or check stovf-math p between 1/13 and 1/15 may also be considered.






                              share|cite|improve this answer














                              Just a thought, that may be worth mentioning:



                              The expression:



                              $$p=(frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdot cdot cdotcdotfrac{99}{100})$$



                              We could use the following identities:



                              Product of $n$ odd numbers =



                              $$p_o = frac{(2n!)}{(n!)2^{n}}$$



                              Product of $n$ even numbers =



                              $$p_e = (n!)2^{n}$$



                              The first $4$ terms of $p$ =



                              $$frac{1.3.5.7}{2.4.6.8}=frac{105}{1152}=0.2734$$



                              We may write $p$ as:



                              $$p=frac{odd_numbers}{even_numbers}=frac{p_o}{p_e}=$$



                              $$p=frac{(2n)!}{((n!)2^{n})^2}$$



                              To prove $p<frac{1}{10}$, we know that (2n)! < n! (for n>1), so we can write:



                              $$p<frac{(n!)}{((n!)2^{n})^2}$$



                              $$p<frac{1}{(n!)({n})^2}$$



                              We could conclude that, for $n >=2$



                              $$p<frac{1}{10}$$



                              for the lower bound, any of the other solution presented may be considered or check stovf-math p between 1/13 and 1/15 may also be considered.







                              share|cite|improve this answer














                              share|cite|improve this answer



                              share|cite|improve this answer








                              edited 7 hours ago

























                              answered 13 hours ago









                              NoChance

                              3,58121221




                              3,58121221






















                                  up vote
                                  0
                                  down vote













                                  This is tedious and unsophisticated, but don't knock it, it works! :)



                                  As well as answering the present question, it also answers the linked question, prove $frac{1}{13}<frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdotsfrac{99}{100}<frac{1}{12}$.



                                  We need a preliminary lemma:




                                  If
                                  $$
                                  k = left(1 - frac{1}{52^2}right)left(1 - frac{1}{56^2}right)cdotsleft(1 - frac{1}{96^2}right),
                                  $$

                                  then
                                  $$
                                  frac{383}{384} < k < frac{1300}{1303}.
                                  $$

                                  Rounding up and down, as appropriate, this is approximately
                                  $$
                                  0.997395 < k < 0.997698,
                                  $$

                                  but of course we avoid using such calculations.




                                  Proof. By the Weierstrass product inequality, we have
                                  $$
                                  1 - s < k < frac{1}{1 + s},
                                  $$

                                  where
                                  $$
                                  s = frac{1}{52^2} + frac{1}{56^2} + cdots + frac{1}{96^2} =
                                  frac{1}{16}left(frac{1}{13^2} + frac{1}{14^2} + cdots + frac{1}{24^2}right).
                                  $$

                                  Telescoping,
                                  $$
                                  frac{12}{325} =
                                  frac{1}{13cdot14} + frac{1}{14cdot15} + cdots + frac{1}{24cdot25}
                                  < 16s <
                                  frac{1}{12cdot13} + frac{1}{13cdot14} + cdots + frac{1}{23cdot24}
                                  = frac{1}{24},
                                  $$

                                  therefore
                                  $$
                                  1 - frac{1}{384} < k < frac{1}{1 + frac{3}{1300}},
                                  $$

                                  as required. $square$



                                  The number we wish to approximate is
                                  $$
                                  P = frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdotsfrac{99}{100}
                                  = frac{51cdot53cdot55cdots97cdot99}{2^{25}cdot4cdot8cdot12cdots96cdot100}
                                  = kQ,
                                  $$

                                  where
                                  begin{gather*}
                                  Q = frac{52^2cdot56^2cdots96^2cdot99}{2^{75}cdot25!}
                                  = frac{13cdot14cdots24cdot99}{2^{27}cdot12!cdot25}
                                  = frac{13cdot15cdot17cdot19cdot21cdot23cdot99}{2^{21}cdot6!cdot25} \
                                  = frac{7cdot13cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot99}{2^{25}cdot25}.
                                  end{gather*}

                                  Therefore, using the bounds obtained for $k$ in the lemma,
                                  begin{equation}
                                  tag{$1$}label{ineq:1}
                                  frac{7cdot13cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot33cdot383}{2^{32}cdot25}
                                  < P <
                                  frac{7cdot13^2cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot99}{2^{23}cdot1303}.
                                  end{equation}

                                  Although this is well within the range of easy hand calculation, I lazily used a calculator for most of the work (only doubling $2^{22}cdot1303 = 5{,}465{,}178{,}112$ at the last stage by hand), to get
                                  begin{equation}
                                  tag{$2$}label{ineq:2}
                                  frac{8{,}544{,}456{,}921}{107{,}374{,}182{,}400} < P < frac{870{,}062{,}193}{10{,}930{,}356{,}224},
                                  end{equation}

                                  or approximately
                                  $$
                                  0.079576 < P < 0.079601.
                                  $$

                                  One way to "simplify" eqref{ineq:1} (although it seems simpler to me to calculate eqref{ineq:2} and be done with it!) is as follows:



                                  For the upper bound, observe that $7cdot13cdot19 = 1729 = 1 + 12^3$ (famously!), and $1302 = 2cdot3cdot7cdot31$, so
                                  $$
                                  frac{7cdot13cdot19}{1303} < frac{1728}{2cdot3cdot7cdot31} = frac{288}{217} < frac{288}{216} = frac{4}{3},
                                  $$

                                  (as one can now easily verify with hindsight), therefore
                                  $$
                                  P < frac{13cdot17cdot23cdot99}{2^{21}cdot3} < frac{17cdot300cdot100}{2^{11}cdot3cdot1000} = frac{85}{1024} < frac{1}{12}.
                                  $$



                                  For the lower bound, first simplify $Q$ by noticing that $7cdot17cdot19cdot23 = 52003 > 52000 = 2^5cdot5^3cdot13$, whence
                                  $$
                                  Q > frac{5cdot13^2cdot99}{2^{20}} = frac{5cdot13cdot1287}{2^{20}} > frac{5cdot13cdot1280}{2^{20}} = frac{5^2cdot13}{2^{12}},
                                  $$

                                  and then, instead of using the lower bound from the lemma directly, weaken it to $P > frac{64}{65}Q$, which gives
                                  $$
                                  P > frac{5}{64} > frac{1}{13}.
                                  $$






                                  share|cite|improve this answer

























                                    up vote
                                    0
                                    down vote













                                    This is tedious and unsophisticated, but don't knock it, it works! :)



                                    As well as answering the present question, it also answers the linked question, prove $frac{1}{13}<frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdotsfrac{99}{100}<frac{1}{12}$.



                                    We need a preliminary lemma:




                                    If
                                    $$
                                    k = left(1 - frac{1}{52^2}right)left(1 - frac{1}{56^2}right)cdotsleft(1 - frac{1}{96^2}right),
                                    $$

                                    then
                                    $$
                                    frac{383}{384} < k < frac{1300}{1303}.
                                    $$

                                    Rounding up and down, as appropriate, this is approximately
                                    $$
                                    0.997395 < k < 0.997698,
                                    $$

                                    but of course we avoid using such calculations.




                                    Proof. By the Weierstrass product inequality, we have
                                    $$
                                    1 - s < k < frac{1}{1 + s},
                                    $$

                                    where
                                    $$
                                    s = frac{1}{52^2} + frac{1}{56^2} + cdots + frac{1}{96^2} =
                                    frac{1}{16}left(frac{1}{13^2} + frac{1}{14^2} + cdots + frac{1}{24^2}right).
                                    $$

                                    Telescoping,
                                    $$
                                    frac{12}{325} =
                                    frac{1}{13cdot14} + frac{1}{14cdot15} + cdots + frac{1}{24cdot25}
                                    < 16s <
                                    frac{1}{12cdot13} + frac{1}{13cdot14} + cdots + frac{1}{23cdot24}
                                    = frac{1}{24},
                                    $$

                                    therefore
                                    $$
                                    1 - frac{1}{384} < k < frac{1}{1 + frac{3}{1300}},
                                    $$

                                    as required. $square$



                                    The number we wish to approximate is
                                    $$
                                    P = frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdotsfrac{99}{100}
                                    = frac{51cdot53cdot55cdots97cdot99}{2^{25}cdot4cdot8cdot12cdots96cdot100}
                                    = kQ,
                                    $$

                                    where
                                    begin{gather*}
                                    Q = frac{52^2cdot56^2cdots96^2cdot99}{2^{75}cdot25!}
                                    = frac{13cdot14cdots24cdot99}{2^{27}cdot12!cdot25}
                                    = frac{13cdot15cdot17cdot19cdot21cdot23cdot99}{2^{21}cdot6!cdot25} \
                                    = frac{7cdot13cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot99}{2^{25}cdot25}.
                                    end{gather*}

                                    Therefore, using the bounds obtained for $k$ in the lemma,
                                    begin{equation}
                                    tag{$1$}label{ineq:1}
                                    frac{7cdot13cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot33cdot383}{2^{32}cdot25}
                                    < P <
                                    frac{7cdot13^2cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot99}{2^{23}cdot1303}.
                                    end{equation}

                                    Although this is well within the range of easy hand calculation, I lazily used a calculator for most of the work (only doubling $2^{22}cdot1303 = 5{,}465{,}178{,}112$ at the last stage by hand), to get
                                    begin{equation}
                                    tag{$2$}label{ineq:2}
                                    frac{8{,}544{,}456{,}921}{107{,}374{,}182{,}400} < P < frac{870{,}062{,}193}{10{,}930{,}356{,}224},
                                    end{equation}

                                    or approximately
                                    $$
                                    0.079576 < P < 0.079601.
                                    $$

                                    One way to "simplify" eqref{ineq:1} (although it seems simpler to me to calculate eqref{ineq:2} and be done with it!) is as follows:



                                    For the upper bound, observe that $7cdot13cdot19 = 1729 = 1 + 12^3$ (famously!), and $1302 = 2cdot3cdot7cdot31$, so
                                    $$
                                    frac{7cdot13cdot19}{1303} < frac{1728}{2cdot3cdot7cdot31} = frac{288}{217} < frac{288}{216} = frac{4}{3},
                                    $$

                                    (as one can now easily verify with hindsight), therefore
                                    $$
                                    P < frac{13cdot17cdot23cdot99}{2^{21}cdot3} < frac{17cdot300cdot100}{2^{11}cdot3cdot1000} = frac{85}{1024} < frac{1}{12}.
                                    $$



                                    For the lower bound, first simplify $Q$ by noticing that $7cdot17cdot19cdot23 = 52003 > 52000 = 2^5cdot5^3cdot13$, whence
                                    $$
                                    Q > frac{5cdot13^2cdot99}{2^{20}} = frac{5cdot13cdot1287}{2^{20}} > frac{5cdot13cdot1280}{2^{20}} = frac{5^2cdot13}{2^{12}},
                                    $$

                                    and then, instead of using the lower bound from the lemma directly, weaken it to $P > frac{64}{65}Q$, which gives
                                    $$
                                    P > frac{5}{64} > frac{1}{13}.
                                    $$






                                    share|cite|improve this answer























                                      up vote
                                      0
                                      down vote










                                      up vote
                                      0
                                      down vote









                                      This is tedious and unsophisticated, but don't knock it, it works! :)



                                      As well as answering the present question, it also answers the linked question, prove $frac{1}{13}<frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdotsfrac{99}{100}<frac{1}{12}$.



                                      We need a preliminary lemma:




                                      If
                                      $$
                                      k = left(1 - frac{1}{52^2}right)left(1 - frac{1}{56^2}right)cdotsleft(1 - frac{1}{96^2}right),
                                      $$

                                      then
                                      $$
                                      frac{383}{384} < k < frac{1300}{1303}.
                                      $$

                                      Rounding up and down, as appropriate, this is approximately
                                      $$
                                      0.997395 < k < 0.997698,
                                      $$

                                      but of course we avoid using such calculations.




                                      Proof. By the Weierstrass product inequality, we have
                                      $$
                                      1 - s < k < frac{1}{1 + s},
                                      $$

                                      where
                                      $$
                                      s = frac{1}{52^2} + frac{1}{56^2} + cdots + frac{1}{96^2} =
                                      frac{1}{16}left(frac{1}{13^2} + frac{1}{14^2} + cdots + frac{1}{24^2}right).
                                      $$

                                      Telescoping,
                                      $$
                                      frac{12}{325} =
                                      frac{1}{13cdot14} + frac{1}{14cdot15} + cdots + frac{1}{24cdot25}
                                      < 16s <
                                      frac{1}{12cdot13} + frac{1}{13cdot14} + cdots + frac{1}{23cdot24}
                                      = frac{1}{24},
                                      $$

                                      therefore
                                      $$
                                      1 - frac{1}{384} < k < frac{1}{1 + frac{3}{1300}},
                                      $$

                                      as required. $square$



                                      The number we wish to approximate is
                                      $$
                                      P = frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdotsfrac{99}{100}
                                      = frac{51cdot53cdot55cdots97cdot99}{2^{25}cdot4cdot8cdot12cdots96cdot100}
                                      = kQ,
                                      $$

                                      where
                                      begin{gather*}
                                      Q = frac{52^2cdot56^2cdots96^2cdot99}{2^{75}cdot25!}
                                      = frac{13cdot14cdots24cdot99}{2^{27}cdot12!cdot25}
                                      = frac{13cdot15cdot17cdot19cdot21cdot23cdot99}{2^{21}cdot6!cdot25} \
                                      = frac{7cdot13cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot99}{2^{25}cdot25}.
                                      end{gather*}

                                      Therefore, using the bounds obtained for $k$ in the lemma,
                                      begin{equation}
                                      tag{$1$}label{ineq:1}
                                      frac{7cdot13cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot33cdot383}{2^{32}cdot25}
                                      < P <
                                      frac{7cdot13^2cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot99}{2^{23}cdot1303}.
                                      end{equation}

                                      Although this is well within the range of easy hand calculation, I lazily used a calculator for most of the work (only doubling $2^{22}cdot1303 = 5{,}465{,}178{,}112$ at the last stage by hand), to get
                                      begin{equation}
                                      tag{$2$}label{ineq:2}
                                      frac{8{,}544{,}456{,}921}{107{,}374{,}182{,}400} < P < frac{870{,}062{,}193}{10{,}930{,}356{,}224},
                                      end{equation}

                                      or approximately
                                      $$
                                      0.079576 < P < 0.079601.
                                      $$

                                      One way to "simplify" eqref{ineq:1} (although it seems simpler to me to calculate eqref{ineq:2} and be done with it!) is as follows:



                                      For the upper bound, observe that $7cdot13cdot19 = 1729 = 1 + 12^3$ (famously!), and $1302 = 2cdot3cdot7cdot31$, so
                                      $$
                                      frac{7cdot13cdot19}{1303} < frac{1728}{2cdot3cdot7cdot31} = frac{288}{217} < frac{288}{216} = frac{4}{3},
                                      $$

                                      (as one can now easily verify with hindsight), therefore
                                      $$
                                      P < frac{13cdot17cdot23cdot99}{2^{21}cdot3} < frac{17cdot300cdot100}{2^{11}cdot3cdot1000} = frac{85}{1024} < frac{1}{12}.
                                      $$



                                      For the lower bound, first simplify $Q$ by noticing that $7cdot17cdot19cdot23 = 52003 > 52000 = 2^5cdot5^3cdot13$, whence
                                      $$
                                      Q > frac{5cdot13^2cdot99}{2^{20}} = frac{5cdot13cdot1287}{2^{20}} > frac{5cdot13cdot1280}{2^{20}} = frac{5^2cdot13}{2^{12}},
                                      $$

                                      and then, instead of using the lower bound from the lemma directly, weaken it to $P > frac{64}{65}Q$, which gives
                                      $$
                                      P > frac{5}{64} > frac{1}{13}.
                                      $$






                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      This is tedious and unsophisticated, but don't knock it, it works! :)



                                      As well as answering the present question, it also answers the linked question, prove $frac{1}{13}<frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdotsfrac{99}{100}<frac{1}{12}$.



                                      We need a preliminary lemma:




                                      If
                                      $$
                                      k = left(1 - frac{1}{52^2}right)left(1 - frac{1}{56^2}right)cdotsleft(1 - frac{1}{96^2}right),
                                      $$

                                      then
                                      $$
                                      frac{383}{384} < k < frac{1300}{1303}.
                                      $$

                                      Rounding up and down, as appropriate, this is approximately
                                      $$
                                      0.997395 < k < 0.997698,
                                      $$

                                      but of course we avoid using such calculations.




                                      Proof. By the Weierstrass product inequality, we have
                                      $$
                                      1 - s < k < frac{1}{1 + s},
                                      $$

                                      where
                                      $$
                                      s = frac{1}{52^2} + frac{1}{56^2} + cdots + frac{1}{96^2} =
                                      frac{1}{16}left(frac{1}{13^2} + frac{1}{14^2} + cdots + frac{1}{24^2}right).
                                      $$

                                      Telescoping,
                                      $$
                                      frac{12}{325} =
                                      frac{1}{13cdot14} + frac{1}{14cdot15} + cdots + frac{1}{24cdot25}
                                      < 16s <
                                      frac{1}{12cdot13} + frac{1}{13cdot14} + cdots + frac{1}{23cdot24}
                                      = frac{1}{24},
                                      $$

                                      therefore
                                      $$
                                      1 - frac{1}{384} < k < frac{1}{1 + frac{3}{1300}},
                                      $$

                                      as required. $square$



                                      The number we wish to approximate is
                                      $$
                                      P = frac{1}{2}cdotfrac{3}{4}cdotfrac{5}{6}cdotsfrac{99}{100}
                                      = frac{51cdot53cdot55cdots97cdot99}{2^{25}cdot4cdot8cdot12cdots96cdot100}
                                      = kQ,
                                      $$

                                      where
                                      begin{gather*}
                                      Q = frac{52^2cdot56^2cdots96^2cdot99}{2^{75}cdot25!}
                                      = frac{13cdot14cdots24cdot99}{2^{27}cdot12!cdot25}
                                      = frac{13cdot15cdot17cdot19cdot21cdot23cdot99}{2^{21}cdot6!cdot25} \
                                      = frac{7cdot13cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot99}{2^{25}cdot25}.
                                      end{gather*}

                                      Therefore, using the bounds obtained for $k$ in the lemma,
                                      begin{equation}
                                      tag{$1$}label{ineq:1}
                                      frac{7cdot13cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot33cdot383}{2^{32}cdot25}
                                      < P <
                                      frac{7cdot13^2cdot17cdot19cdot23cdot99}{2^{23}cdot1303}.
                                      end{equation}

                                      Although this is well within the range of easy hand calculation, I lazily used a calculator for most of the work (only doubling $2^{22}cdot1303 = 5{,}465{,}178{,}112$ at the last stage by hand), to get
                                      begin{equation}
                                      tag{$2$}label{ineq:2}
                                      frac{8{,}544{,}456{,}921}{107{,}374{,}182{,}400} < P < frac{870{,}062{,}193}{10{,}930{,}356{,}224},
                                      end{equation}

                                      or approximately
                                      $$
                                      0.079576 < P < 0.079601.
                                      $$

                                      One way to "simplify" eqref{ineq:1} (although it seems simpler to me to calculate eqref{ineq:2} and be done with it!) is as follows:



                                      For the upper bound, observe that $7cdot13cdot19 = 1729 = 1 + 12^3$ (famously!), and $1302 = 2cdot3cdot7cdot31$, so
                                      $$
                                      frac{7cdot13cdot19}{1303} < frac{1728}{2cdot3cdot7cdot31} = frac{288}{217} < frac{288}{216} = frac{4}{3},
                                      $$

                                      (as one can now easily verify with hindsight), therefore
                                      $$
                                      P < frac{13cdot17cdot23cdot99}{2^{21}cdot3} < frac{17cdot300cdot100}{2^{11}cdot3cdot1000} = frac{85}{1024} < frac{1}{12}.
                                      $$



                                      For the lower bound, first simplify $Q$ by noticing that $7cdot17cdot19cdot23 = 52003 > 52000 = 2^5cdot5^3cdot13$, whence
                                      $$
                                      Q > frac{5cdot13^2cdot99}{2^{20}} = frac{5cdot13cdot1287}{2^{20}} > frac{5cdot13cdot1280}{2^{20}} = frac{5^2cdot13}{2^{12}},
                                      $$

                                      and then, instead of using the lower bound from the lemma directly, weaken it to $P > frac{64}{65}Q$, which gives
                                      $$
                                      P > frac{5}{64} > frac{1}{13}.
                                      $$







                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      share|cite|improve this answer



                                      share|cite|improve this answer










                                      answered 1 hour ago









                                      Calum Gilhooley

                                      3,983529




                                      3,983529






























                                           

                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded



















































                                           


                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function () {
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3004689%2ffrac115-frac12-cdot-frac34-cdot-frac56-cdot-cdot-cdot-cdo%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

                                          Tonle Sap (See)

                                          I get strange results when I access the Sqlitedatabase with Unity C# via XAMPP

                                          Guatemaltekische Davis-Cup-Mannschaft