11/17/2012, 11:47 PM
Lim x-> +oo slog(super!(x)) < x(1+eps).
The reason is gamma(x) grows slower than exp(sexp(slog(x)+eps)).
Thus Lim x-> +oo [slog(super!(x))-x]/x = 0
However statements as slog(super!(x)) = x + O(ln(x)) are still mysterious.
I guess slog(super!(x)) = x + O(sqrt(slog(x log(x)))).
Although my guess looks strong , sheldon's statement is even stronger : slog(super!(x)) = x + O(1).
In other words , Im not convinced yet ...
regards
tommy1729
The reason is gamma(x) grows slower than exp(sexp(slog(x)+eps)).
Thus Lim x-> +oo [slog(super!(x))-x]/x = 0
However statements as slog(super!(x)) = x + O(ln(x)) are still mysterious.
I guess slog(super!(x)) = x + O(sqrt(slog(x log(x)))).
Although my guess looks strong , sheldon's statement is even stronger : slog(super!(x)) = x + O(1).
In other words , Im not convinced yet ...
regards
tommy1729

