Evaluating $limlimits_{ntoinfty} e^{-n} sumlimits_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}$












191














I'm supposed to calculate:



$$lim_{ntoinfty} e^{-n} sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}$$



By using W|A, i may guess that the limit is $frac{1}{2}$ that is a pretty interesting and nice result. I wonder in which ways we may approach it.










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 4




    Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/121099/…
    – leonbloy
    Jun 19 '12 at 15:46










  • This question was merged into the present one.
    – user642796
    Oct 1 '13 at 17:16










  • [Older question, perhaps merge...] possible duplicate of Partial sums of exponential series
    – Aryabhata
    Jan 23 '15 at 17:46












  • Also known as Dobiński's formula
    – Machinato
    Jun 14 '17 at 13:08






  • 1




    What is W|A , in the question. It says "by using W|A".
    – john
    Oct 28 '18 at 10:35
















191














I'm supposed to calculate:



$$lim_{ntoinfty} e^{-n} sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}$$



By using W|A, i may guess that the limit is $frac{1}{2}$ that is a pretty interesting and nice result. I wonder in which ways we may approach it.










share|cite|improve this question




















  • 4




    Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/121099/…
    – leonbloy
    Jun 19 '12 at 15:46










  • This question was merged into the present one.
    – user642796
    Oct 1 '13 at 17:16










  • [Older question, perhaps merge...] possible duplicate of Partial sums of exponential series
    – Aryabhata
    Jan 23 '15 at 17:46












  • Also known as Dobiński's formula
    – Machinato
    Jun 14 '17 at 13:08






  • 1




    What is W|A , in the question. It says "by using W|A".
    – john
    Oct 28 '18 at 10:35














191












191








191


132





I'm supposed to calculate:



$$lim_{ntoinfty} e^{-n} sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}$$



By using W|A, i may guess that the limit is $frac{1}{2}$ that is a pretty interesting and nice result. I wonder in which ways we may approach it.










share|cite|improve this question















I'm supposed to calculate:



$$lim_{ntoinfty} e^{-n} sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}$$



By using W|A, i may guess that the limit is $frac{1}{2}$ that is a pretty interesting and nice result. I wonder in which ways we may approach it.







calculus real-analysis sequences-and-series limits






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited May 24 '16 at 19:46









Did

246k23220454




246k23220454










asked Jun 19 '12 at 9:38









user 1357113

22.3k876226




22.3k876226








  • 4




    Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/121099/…
    – leonbloy
    Jun 19 '12 at 15:46










  • This question was merged into the present one.
    – user642796
    Oct 1 '13 at 17:16










  • [Older question, perhaps merge...] possible duplicate of Partial sums of exponential series
    – Aryabhata
    Jan 23 '15 at 17:46












  • Also known as Dobiński's formula
    – Machinato
    Jun 14 '17 at 13:08






  • 1




    What is W|A , in the question. It says "by using W|A".
    – john
    Oct 28 '18 at 10:35














  • 4




    Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/121099/…
    – leonbloy
    Jun 19 '12 at 15:46










  • This question was merged into the present one.
    – user642796
    Oct 1 '13 at 17:16










  • [Older question, perhaps merge...] possible duplicate of Partial sums of exponential series
    – Aryabhata
    Jan 23 '15 at 17:46












  • Also known as Dobiński's formula
    – Machinato
    Jun 14 '17 at 13:08






  • 1




    What is W|A , in the question. It says "by using W|A".
    – john
    Oct 28 '18 at 10:35








4




4




Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/121099/…
– leonbloy
Jun 19 '12 at 15:46




Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/121099/…
– leonbloy
Jun 19 '12 at 15:46












This question was merged into the present one.
– user642796
Oct 1 '13 at 17:16




This question was merged into the present one.
– user642796
Oct 1 '13 at 17:16












[Older question, perhaps merge...] possible duplicate of Partial sums of exponential series
– Aryabhata
Jan 23 '15 at 17:46






[Older question, perhaps merge...] possible duplicate of Partial sums of exponential series
– Aryabhata
Jan 23 '15 at 17:46














Also known as Dobiński's formula
– Machinato
Jun 14 '17 at 13:08




Also known as Dobiński's formula
– Machinato
Jun 14 '17 at 13:08




1




1




What is W|A , in the question. It says "by using W|A".
– john
Oct 28 '18 at 10:35




What is W|A , in the question. It says "by using W|A".
– john
Oct 28 '18 at 10:35










9 Answers
9






active

oldest

votes


















120














Edited. I justified the application of the dominated convergence theorem.



By a simple calculation,



$$ begin{align*}
e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
&= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} sum_{k=0}^{n}binom{n}{k} n^k (n-k)! \
(1) cdots quad &= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} sum_{k=0}^{n}binom{n}{k} n^k int_{0}^{infty} t^{n-k}e^{-t} , dt\
&= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} int_{0}^{infty} (n+t)^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
(2) cdots quad &= frac{1}{n!} int_{n}^{infty} t^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
&= 1 - frac{1}{n!} int_{0}^{n} t^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
(3) cdots quad &= 1 - frac{sqrt{n} (n/e)^n}{n!} int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du.
end{align*}$$



We remark that




  1. In $text{(1)}$, we utilized the famous formula $ n! = int_{0}^{infty} t^n e^{-t} , dt$.

  2. In $text{(2)}$, the substitution $t + n mapsto t$ is used.

  3. In $text{(3)}$, the substitution $t = n - sqrt{n}u$ is used.


Then in view of the Stirling's formula, it suffices to show that



$$int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du xrightarrow{ntoinfty} sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}.$$



The idea is to introduce the function



$$ g_n (u) = left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} mathbf{1}_{(0, sqrt{n})}(u) $$



and apply pointwise limit to the integrand as $n to infty$. This is justified once we find a dominating function for the sequence $(g_n)$. But notice that if $0 < u < sqrt{n}$, then



$$ log g_n (u)
= n log left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right) + sqrt{n} u
= -frac{u^2}{2} - frac{u^3}{3sqrt{n}} - frac{u^4}{4n} - cdots leq -frac{u^2}{2}. $$



From this we have $g_n (u) leq e^{-u^2 /2}$ for all $n$ and $g_n (u) to e^{-u^2 / 2}$ as $n to infty$. Therefore by dominated convergence theorem and Gaussian integral,



$$ int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du = int_{0}^{infty} g_n (u) , du xrightarrow{ntoinfty} int_{0}^{infty} e^{-u^2/2} , du = sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}. $$






share|cite|improve this answer



















  • 2




    Your second equation is closely related to this question (which I answered).
    – robjohn
    Jun 19 '12 at 15:47



















124















The probabilistic way:




This is $P[N_nleqslant n]$ where $N_n$ is a random variable with Poisson distribution of parameter $n$. Hence each $N_n$ is distributed like $X_1+cdots+X_n$ where the random variables $(X_k)$ are independent and identically distributed with Poisson distribution of parameter $1$.



By the central limit theorem, $Y_n=frac1{sqrt{n}}(X_1+cdots+X_n-n)$ converges in distribution to a standard normal random variable $Z$, in particular, $P[Y_nleqslant 0]to P[Zleqslant0]$.



Finally, $P[Zleqslant0]=frac12$ and $[N_nleqslant n]=[Y_nleqslant 0]$ hence $P[N_nleqslant n]tofrac12$, QED.





The analytical way, completing your try:




Hence, I know that what I need to do is to find $limlimits_{ntoinfty}I_n$, where
$$
I_n=frac{e^{-n}}{n!}int_{0}^n (n-t)^ne^tdt.$$




To begin with, let $u(t)=(1-t)e^t$, then $I_n=dfrac{e^{-n}n^n}{n!}nJ_n$ with
$$
J_n=int_{0}^1 u(t)^nmathrm dt.
$$
Now, $u(t)leqslantmathrm e^{-t^2/2}$ hence
$$
J_nleqslantint_0^1mathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dtleqslantint_0^inftymathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dt=sqrt{frac{pi}{2n}}.
$$
Likewise, the function $tmapsto u(t)mathrm e^{t^2/2}$ is decreasing on $tgeqslant0$ hence $u(t)geqslant c_nmathrm e^{-t^2/2}$ on $tleqslant1/n^{1/4}$, with $c_n=u(1/n^{1/4})mathrm e^{-1/(2sqrt{n})}$, hence
$$
J_ngeqslant c_nint_0^{1/n^{1/4}}mathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dt=frac{c_n}{sqrt{n}}int_0^{n^{1/4}}mathrm e^{-t^2/2}mathrm dt=frac{c_n}{sqrt{n}}sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}(1+o(1)).
$$
Since $c_nto1$, all this proves that $sqrt{n}J_ntosqrt{fracpi2}$. Stirling formula shows that the prefactor $frac{e^{-n}n^n}{n!}$ is equivalent to $frac1{sqrt{2pi n}}$. Regrouping everything, one sees that $I_nsimfrac1{sqrt{2pi n}}nsqrt{fracpi{2n}}=frac12$.




Moral:
The probabilistic way is shorter, easier, more illuminating, and more fun.



Caveat:
My advice in these matters is, clearly, horribly biased.







share|cite|improve this answer































    46














    Integration by parts yields
    $$
    frac{1}{k!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^k,mathrm{d}t=frac{1}{k!}x^ke^{-x}+frac{1}{(k-1)!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^{k-1},mathrm{d}ttag{1}
    $$
    Iterating $(1)$ gives
    $$
    frac{1}{n!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t=e^{-x}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{x^k}{k!}tag{2}
    $$
    Thus, we get
    $$
    e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!}=frac{1}{n!}int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}ttag{3}
    $$
    Now, I will reproduce part of the argument I give here, which develops a full asymptotic expansion. Additionally, I include some error estimates that were previously missing.
    $$
    begin{align}
    int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t
    &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-ns},(s+1)^n,mathrm{d}s\
    &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-n(s-log(1+s)},mathrm{d}s\
    &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}utag{4}
    end{align}
    $$
    where $t=n(s+1)$ and $u^2/2=s-log(1+s)$.



    Note that $frac{ss'}{1+s}=u$; thus, when $sge1$, $s'le2u$. This leads to the bound
    $$
    begin{align}
    int_{sge1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u
    &leint_{3/4}^infty e^{-nu^2/2},2u,mathrm{d}u\
    &=frac2ne^{-frac98n}tag{5}
    end{align}
    $$
    $(5)$ also show that
    $$
    int_{sge1}e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}ulefrac2ne^{-frac98n}tag{6}
    $$



    For $|s|<1$, we get
    $$
    u^2/2=s-log(1+s)=s^2/2-s^3/3+s^4/4-dotstag{7}
    $$
    We can invert the series to get $s'=1+frac23u+O(u^2)$. Therefore,
    $$
    begin{align}
    int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u
    &=int_{sin[0,1]} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u+color{red}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u}\
    &=int_0^inftyleft(1+frac23uright)e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}u-color{darkorange}{int_{s>1}left(1+frac23uright)e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}u}\
    &+int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},O(u^2),mathrm{d}u-color{darkorange}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},O(u^2),mathrm{d}u}\
    &+color{red}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u}\
    &=sqrt{frac{pi}{2n}}+frac2{3n}+Oleft(n^{-3/2}right)tag{8}
    end{align}
    $$
    The red and orange integrals decrease exponentially by $(5)$ and $(6)$.



    Plugging $(8)$ into $(4)$ yields
    $$
    int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t=left(sqrt{frac{pi n}{2}}+frac23right),n^ne^{-n}+O(n^{n-1/2}e^{-n})tag{9}
    $$
    The argument above can be used to prove Stirling's approximation, which says that
    $$
    n!=sqrt{2pi n},n^ne^{-n}+O(n^{n-1/2}e^{-n})tag{10}
    $$
    Combining $(9)$ and $(10)$ yields
    $$
    begin{align}
    e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!}
    &=frac{1}{n!}int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t\
    &=frac12+frac{2/3}{sqrt{2pi n}}+O(n^{-1})tag{11}
    end{align}
    $$






    share|cite|improve this answer



















    • 1




      Would the downvoter care to comment (he asked, expecting the answer "no")?
      – robjohn
      May 12 '18 at 14:01












    • hey rob, sadly the link in your answer is dead :(
      – tired
      Jun 10 '18 at 14:17










    • Yeah too many downvoters here :/ I upvoted this. Very Nice answer.
      – mick
      Jun 29 '18 at 21:49



















    27














    If you'd like to see formal solution using calculus methods check this article http://www.emis.de/journals/AMAPN/vol15/voros.pdf






    share|cite|improve this answer

















    • 3




      I wish you had copied the article here. It seemed small enough. References have a habit of pointing to NULL over time.
      – steven gregory
      Aug 22 '15 at 5:18



















    23














    The sum is related to the partial exponential sum, and thus to the incomplete gamma function,
    $$begin{eqnarray*}
    e^{-n} sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
    &=& e^{-n} e_n(n) \
    &=& frac{Gamma(n+1,n)}{Gamma(n+1)},
    end{eqnarray*}$$
    since $e_n(x) = sum_{k=0}^n x^k/k! = e^x Gamma(n+1,x)/Gamma(n+1)$.
    But
    $$begin{eqnarray*}
    Gamma(n+1,n) &=& sqrt{2pi}, n^{n+1/2}e^{-n}left(frac{1}{2} + frac{1}{3}sqrt{frac{2}{npi}} + Oleft(frac{1}{n}right) right).
    end{eqnarray*}$$
    The first term in the asymptotic expansion for $Gamma(n+1,n)$ can be found by applying the saddle point method to
    $$Gamma(n+1,n) = int_n^infty dt, t^n e^{-t}.$$
    The higher order terms are in principle straightforward to compute.
    Using Stirling's approximation, we find
    $$e^{-n} sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
    = frac{1}{2}
    + frac{1}{3}sqrt{frac{2}{npi}}
    + Oleft(frac{1}{n}right).$$
    Thus, the limit is $1/2$, as found by @sos440 and @robjohn.
    This limit is a special case of DLMF 8.11.13.



    I just noticed a comment that suggests this be done using high school level math.
    If this is a standard exercise at your high school, maybe they covered the incomplete gamma function! ;-)






    share|cite|improve this answer

















    • 2




      (+1) I derived this asymptotic expansion here in answer to a question on sci.math. I computed a few terms past $frac12$: $$ frac12+frac{1}{sqrt{2pi n}}left(frac23-frac{23}{270n}+frac{23}{3024n^2}+dotsright) $$
      – robjohn
      Jun 20 '12 at 3:14










    • @robjohn: Thanks for the link, I'll have a look. By the way, I voted up your nice solution a couple of hours ago. I like your short and sweet derivation of (3).
      – user26872
      Jun 20 '12 at 3:47










    • @robjohn As steven gregory says above "I wish you had copied the article here. It seemed small enough. References have a habit of pointing to NULL over time" . Please, could you upload somewhere again? I'm curious about it.
      – vesszabo
      Jul 4 '17 at 21:13



















    21














    $newcommand{+}{^{dagger}}
    newcommand{angles}[1]{leftlangle #1 rightrangle}
    newcommand{braces}[1]{leftlbrace #1 rightrbrace}
    newcommand{bracks}[1]{leftlbrack #1 rightrbrack}
    newcommand{dd}{{rm d}}
    newcommand{isdiv}{,left.rightvert,}
    newcommand{ds}[1]{displaystyle{#1}}
    newcommand{equalby}[1]{{#1 atop {= atop vphantom{huge A}}}}
    newcommand{expo}[1]{,{rm e}^{#1},}
    newcommand{floor}[1]{,leftlfloor #1 rightrfloor,}
    newcommand{half}{{1 over 2}}
    newcommand{ic}{{rm i}}
    newcommand{imp}{Longrightarrow}
    newcommand{ket}[1]{leftvert #1rightrangle}
    newcommand{pars}[1]{left( #1 right)}
    newcommand{partiald}[3]{frac{partial^{#1} #2}{partial #3^{#1}}}
    newcommand{pp}{{cal P}}
    newcommand{root}[2]{,sqrt[#1]{,#2,},}
    newcommand{sech}{,{rm sech}}
    newcommand{sgn}{,{rm sgn}}
    newcommand{totald}[3]{frac{{rm d}^{#1} #2}{{rm d} #3^{#1}}}
    newcommand{ul}[1]{underline{#1}}
    newcommand{verts}[1]{leftvert #1 rightvert}
    newcommand{yy}{Longleftrightarrow}$
    begin{align}&color{#00f}{
    lim_{n to infty}bracks{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}{n^{k} over k!}}}
    \[3mm]&=lim_{n to infty}bracks{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
    exppars{klnpars{n} - lnpars{k!}}}
    \[3mm]&=
    lim_{n to infty}braces{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
    exppars{nlnpars{n} - lnpars{n!} - {1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}}}
    \[3mm]&=
    lim_{n to infty}braces{expo{-n},{n^{n} over n!}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
    exppars{-{1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}}}
    \[3mm]&=
    lim_{n to infty}braces{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!}int_{0}^{n}
    exppars{-{1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}},dd k}
    \[3mm]&=
    lim_{n to infty}bracks{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!}int_{-n}^{0}
    exppars{-,{k^{2} over 2n}},dd k}
    =
    lim_{n to infty}bracks{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!},root{2n}
    int_{-root{n}/2}^{0}exppars{-k^{2}},dd k}
    \[3mm]&=
    lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}
    int_{-infty}^{0}exppars{-k^{2}},dd k}
    =
    lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}
    ,{root{pi} over 2}}
    \[3mm]&=
    half,lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2pi}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}}
    =color{#00f}{Largehalf}
    end{align}






    share|cite|improve this answer



















    • 15




      The second equal sign is a complete mystery. The passage from a sum to an integral also needs justification but it probably holds.
      – Did
      Mar 31 '14 at 16:25








    • 9




      Would you care answering @Did 's question regarding the second equal sign? I am miffed as well. Thank you, Felix Marin.
      – Hans
      May 11 '15 at 17:35






    • 4




      @Did's question has to be answered otherwise this seems to be an suitable answer
      – tired
      Oct 4 '15 at 12:12






    • 3




      yeah for me too, can you please answer @Did 's question?
      – user153330
      Mar 1 '16 at 20:40








    • 1




      Is this supposed to justify the various unsubstantiated claims this post relies on? It does not.
      – Did
      Feb 8 '18 at 17:56



















    18














    I'll give you two hints:



    1) Poisson distributions;



    2) Central limit theorem



    I am not aware of any other technique to solve the problem, so any other answer is appreciated.






    share|cite|improve this answer



















    • 3




      In what country's education system is this a high school exercise?! I ask sincerely because I'm interested in that, and my experience is that even some of the most advanced mathematically education systems don't reach exercises as the one you're proposing...not even close. Of course, I don't know all the education systems (not even close, again), but the expression within the sum seems to be pretty tough...it reminds the series for the exponential function, but that n repeating in the numerator and upper limit...are you sure the expression is accurate?
      – DonAntonio
      Jun 19 '12 at 10:17






    • 2




      This problem is definitely not at high-school level. Without the hints I gave, I doubt most university students (even graduates) would solve it in reasonable time.
      – D. Thomine
      Jun 19 '12 at 10:43










    • The solution using Poisson distribution was also given here: Limit using Poisson distribution
      – Martin Sleziak
      Jun 19 '12 at 15:44










    • We actually made this exercice in our probability course.
      – Math_QED
      Nov 26 '18 at 10:09



















    12














    I do not know how much this will help you.



    For a given $n$, the result is $dfrac{Gamma(n+1,n)}{n Gamma(n)}$ which has a limit equal to $dfrac12$ as $ntoinfty$.






    share|cite|improve this answer































      1














      On this page there is a nice collection of evidence.



      I add another proof which also uses the Stirling formula.



      $displaystyle e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!} = e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=0}^nfrac{k^k (n-k)^{n-k}}{k!(n-k)!} hspace{4cm}$ e.g. here



      $displaystyle = limlimits_{ntoinfty} e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=1}^{n-1}frac{e^k e^{n-k}}{sqrt{2pi k (1+mathcal{O}(1/k))}sqrt{2pi (n-k)(1+mathcal{O}(1/(n-k)))}} $



      $displaystyle = limlimits_{ntoinfty} frac{1}{2pi}frac{1}{n}sumlimits_{k=1}^{n-1}frac{1}{sqrt{frac{k}{n}left(1-frac{k}{n}right)}} =frac{1}{2pi} intlimits_0^1frac{dx}{sqrt{x(1-x)}}=frac{Gamma(frac{1}{2})^2}{2pi~Gamma(1)} = frac{1}{2}$






      share|cite|improve this answer























      • (+1) Interesting idea.
        – user 1357113
        Nov 26 '18 at 22:23












      • @user1357113 : That's kind of you, thanks. :)
        – user90369
        Nov 27 '18 at 8:09











      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',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      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%2f160248%2fevaluating-lim-limits-n-to-infty-e-n-sum-limits-k-0n-fracnkk%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      9 Answers
      9






      active

      oldest

      votes








      9 Answers
      9






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      120














      Edited. I justified the application of the dominated convergence theorem.



      By a simple calculation,



      $$ begin{align*}
      e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
      &= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} sum_{k=0}^{n}binom{n}{k} n^k (n-k)! \
      (1) cdots quad &= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} sum_{k=0}^{n}binom{n}{k} n^k int_{0}^{infty} t^{n-k}e^{-t} , dt\
      &= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} int_{0}^{infty} (n+t)^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
      (2) cdots quad &= frac{1}{n!} int_{n}^{infty} t^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
      &= 1 - frac{1}{n!} int_{0}^{n} t^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
      (3) cdots quad &= 1 - frac{sqrt{n} (n/e)^n}{n!} int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du.
      end{align*}$$



      We remark that




      1. In $text{(1)}$, we utilized the famous formula $ n! = int_{0}^{infty} t^n e^{-t} , dt$.

      2. In $text{(2)}$, the substitution $t + n mapsto t$ is used.

      3. In $text{(3)}$, the substitution $t = n - sqrt{n}u$ is used.


      Then in view of the Stirling's formula, it suffices to show that



      $$int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du xrightarrow{ntoinfty} sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}.$$



      The idea is to introduce the function



      $$ g_n (u) = left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} mathbf{1}_{(0, sqrt{n})}(u) $$



      and apply pointwise limit to the integrand as $n to infty$. This is justified once we find a dominating function for the sequence $(g_n)$. But notice that if $0 < u < sqrt{n}$, then



      $$ log g_n (u)
      = n log left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right) + sqrt{n} u
      = -frac{u^2}{2} - frac{u^3}{3sqrt{n}} - frac{u^4}{4n} - cdots leq -frac{u^2}{2}. $$



      From this we have $g_n (u) leq e^{-u^2 /2}$ for all $n$ and $g_n (u) to e^{-u^2 / 2}$ as $n to infty$. Therefore by dominated convergence theorem and Gaussian integral,



      $$ int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du = int_{0}^{infty} g_n (u) , du xrightarrow{ntoinfty} int_{0}^{infty} e^{-u^2/2} , du = sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}. $$






      share|cite|improve this answer



















      • 2




        Your second equation is closely related to this question (which I answered).
        – robjohn
        Jun 19 '12 at 15:47
















      120














      Edited. I justified the application of the dominated convergence theorem.



      By a simple calculation,



      $$ begin{align*}
      e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
      &= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} sum_{k=0}^{n}binom{n}{k} n^k (n-k)! \
      (1) cdots quad &= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} sum_{k=0}^{n}binom{n}{k} n^k int_{0}^{infty} t^{n-k}e^{-t} , dt\
      &= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} int_{0}^{infty} (n+t)^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
      (2) cdots quad &= frac{1}{n!} int_{n}^{infty} t^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
      &= 1 - frac{1}{n!} int_{0}^{n} t^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
      (3) cdots quad &= 1 - frac{sqrt{n} (n/e)^n}{n!} int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du.
      end{align*}$$



      We remark that




      1. In $text{(1)}$, we utilized the famous formula $ n! = int_{0}^{infty} t^n e^{-t} , dt$.

      2. In $text{(2)}$, the substitution $t + n mapsto t$ is used.

      3. In $text{(3)}$, the substitution $t = n - sqrt{n}u$ is used.


      Then in view of the Stirling's formula, it suffices to show that



      $$int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du xrightarrow{ntoinfty} sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}.$$



      The idea is to introduce the function



      $$ g_n (u) = left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} mathbf{1}_{(0, sqrt{n})}(u) $$



      and apply pointwise limit to the integrand as $n to infty$. This is justified once we find a dominating function for the sequence $(g_n)$. But notice that if $0 < u < sqrt{n}$, then



      $$ log g_n (u)
      = n log left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right) + sqrt{n} u
      = -frac{u^2}{2} - frac{u^3}{3sqrt{n}} - frac{u^4}{4n} - cdots leq -frac{u^2}{2}. $$



      From this we have $g_n (u) leq e^{-u^2 /2}$ for all $n$ and $g_n (u) to e^{-u^2 / 2}$ as $n to infty$. Therefore by dominated convergence theorem and Gaussian integral,



      $$ int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du = int_{0}^{infty} g_n (u) , du xrightarrow{ntoinfty} int_{0}^{infty} e^{-u^2/2} , du = sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}. $$






      share|cite|improve this answer



















      • 2




        Your second equation is closely related to this question (which I answered).
        – robjohn
        Jun 19 '12 at 15:47














      120












      120








      120






      Edited. I justified the application of the dominated convergence theorem.



      By a simple calculation,



      $$ begin{align*}
      e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
      &= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} sum_{k=0}^{n}binom{n}{k} n^k (n-k)! \
      (1) cdots quad &= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} sum_{k=0}^{n}binom{n}{k} n^k int_{0}^{infty} t^{n-k}e^{-t} , dt\
      &= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} int_{0}^{infty} (n+t)^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
      (2) cdots quad &= frac{1}{n!} int_{n}^{infty} t^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
      &= 1 - frac{1}{n!} int_{0}^{n} t^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
      (3) cdots quad &= 1 - frac{sqrt{n} (n/e)^n}{n!} int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du.
      end{align*}$$



      We remark that




      1. In $text{(1)}$, we utilized the famous formula $ n! = int_{0}^{infty} t^n e^{-t} , dt$.

      2. In $text{(2)}$, the substitution $t + n mapsto t$ is used.

      3. In $text{(3)}$, the substitution $t = n - sqrt{n}u$ is used.


      Then in view of the Stirling's formula, it suffices to show that



      $$int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du xrightarrow{ntoinfty} sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}.$$



      The idea is to introduce the function



      $$ g_n (u) = left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} mathbf{1}_{(0, sqrt{n})}(u) $$



      and apply pointwise limit to the integrand as $n to infty$. This is justified once we find a dominating function for the sequence $(g_n)$. But notice that if $0 < u < sqrt{n}$, then



      $$ log g_n (u)
      = n log left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right) + sqrt{n} u
      = -frac{u^2}{2} - frac{u^3}{3sqrt{n}} - frac{u^4}{4n} - cdots leq -frac{u^2}{2}. $$



      From this we have $g_n (u) leq e^{-u^2 /2}$ for all $n$ and $g_n (u) to e^{-u^2 / 2}$ as $n to infty$. Therefore by dominated convergence theorem and Gaussian integral,



      $$ int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du = int_{0}^{infty} g_n (u) , du xrightarrow{ntoinfty} int_{0}^{infty} e^{-u^2/2} , du = sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}. $$






      share|cite|improve this answer














      Edited. I justified the application of the dominated convergence theorem.



      By a simple calculation,



      $$ begin{align*}
      e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
      &= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} sum_{k=0}^{n}binom{n}{k} n^k (n-k)! \
      (1) cdots quad &= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} sum_{k=0}^{n}binom{n}{k} n^k int_{0}^{infty} t^{n-k}e^{-t} , dt\
      &= frac{e^{-n}}{n!} int_{0}^{infty} (n+t)^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
      (2) cdots quad &= frac{1}{n!} int_{n}^{infty} t^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
      &= 1 - frac{1}{n!} int_{0}^{n} t^{n}e^{-t} , dt \
      (3) cdots quad &= 1 - frac{sqrt{n} (n/e)^n}{n!} int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du.
      end{align*}$$



      We remark that




      1. In $text{(1)}$, we utilized the famous formula $ n! = int_{0}^{infty} t^n e^{-t} , dt$.

      2. In $text{(2)}$, the substitution $t + n mapsto t$ is used.

      3. In $text{(3)}$, the substitution $t = n - sqrt{n}u$ is used.


      Then in view of the Stirling's formula, it suffices to show that



      $$int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du xrightarrow{ntoinfty} sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}.$$



      The idea is to introduce the function



      $$ g_n (u) = left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} mathbf{1}_{(0, sqrt{n})}(u) $$



      and apply pointwise limit to the integrand as $n to infty$. This is justified once we find a dominating function for the sequence $(g_n)$. But notice that if $0 < u < sqrt{n}$, then



      $$ log g_n (u)
      = n log left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right) + sqrt{n} u
      = -frac{u^2}{2} - frac{u^3}{3sqrt{n}} - frac{u^4}{4n} - cdots leq -frac{u^2}{2}. $$



      From this we have $g_n (u) leq e^{-u^2 /2}$ for all $n$ and $g_n (u) to e^{-u^2 / 2}$ as $n to infty$. Therefore by dominated convergence theorem and Gaussian integral,



      $$ int_{0}^{sqrt{n}} left(1 - frac{u}{sqrt{n}} right)^{n}e^{sqrt{n}u} , du = int_{0}^{infty} g_n (u) , du xrightarrow{ntoinfty} int_{0}^{infty} e^{-u^2/2} , du = sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}. $$







      share|cite|improve this answer














      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer








      edited Jul 30 '15 at 18:22

























      answered Jun 19 '12 at 11:27









      Sangchul Lee

      91.3k12163264




      91.3k12163264








      • 2




        Your second equation is closely related to this question (which I answered).
        – robjohn
        Jun 19 '12 at 15:47














      • 2




        Your second equation is closely related to this question (which I answered).
        – robjohn
        Jun 19 '12 at 15:47








      2




      2




      Your second equation is closely related to this question (which I answered).
      – robjohn
      Jun 19 '12 at 15:47




      Your second equation is closely related to this question (which I answered).
      – robjohn
      Jun 19 '12 at 15:47











      124















      The probabilistic way:




      This is $P[N_nleqslant n]$ where $N_n$ is a random variable with Poisson distribution of parameter $n$. Hence each $N_n$ is distributed like $X_1+cdots+X_n$ where the random variables $(X_k)$ are independent and identically distributed with Poisson distribution of parameter $1$.



      By the central limit theorem, $Y_n=frac1{sqrt{n}}(X_1+cdots+X_n-n)$ converges in distribution to a standard normal random variable $Z$, in particular, $P[Y_nleqslant 0]to P[Zleqslant0]$.



      Finally, $P[Zleqslant0]=frac12$ and $[N_nleqslant n]=[Y_nleqslant 0]$ hence $P[N_nleqslant n]tofrac12$, QED.





      The analytical way, completing your try:




      Hence, I know that what I need to do is to find $limlimits_{ntoinfty}I_n$, where
      $$
      I_n=frac{e^{-n}}{n!}int_{0}^n (n-t)^ne^tdt.$$




      To begin with, let $u(t)=(1-t)e^t$, then $I_n=dfrac{e^{-n}n^n}{n!}nJ_n$ with
      $$
      J_n=int_{0}^1 u(t)^nmathrm dt.
      $$
      Now, $u(t)leqslantmathrm e^{-t^2/2}$ hence
      $$
      J_nleqslantint_0^1mathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dtleqslantint_0^inftymathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dt=sqrt{frac{pi}{2n}}.
      $$
      Likewise, the function $tmapsto u(t)mathrm e^{t^2/2}$ is decreasing on $tgeqslant0$ hence $u(t)geqslant c_nmathrm e^{-t^2/2}$ on $tleqslant1/n^{1/4}$, with $c_n=u(1/n^{1/4})mathrm e^{-1/(2sqrt{n})}$, hence
      $$
      J_ngeqslant c_nint_0^{1/n^{1/4}}mathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dt=frac{c_n}{sqrt{n}}int_0^{n^{1/4}}mathrm e^{-t^2/2}mathrm dt=frac{c_n}{sqrt{n}}sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}(1+o(1)).
      $$
      Since $c_nto1$, all this proves that $sqrt{n}J_ntosqrt{fracpi2}$. Stirling formula shows that the prefactor $frac{e^{-n}n^n}{n!}$ is equivalent to $frac1{sqrt{2pi n}}$. Regrouping everything, one sees that $I_nsimfrac1{sqrt{2pi n}}nsqrt{fracpi{2n}}=frac12$.




      Moral:
      The probabilistic way is shorter, easier, more illuminating, and more fun.



      Caveat:
      My advice in these matters is, clearly, horribly biased.







      share|cite|improve this answer




























        124















        The probabilistic way:




        This is $P[N_nleqslant n]$ where $N_n$ is a random variable with Poisson distribution of parameter $n$. Hence each $N_n$ is distributed like $X_1+cdots+X_n$ where the random variables $(X_k)$ are independent and identically distributed with Poisson distribution of parameter $1$.



        By the central limit theorem, $Y_n=frac1{sqrt{n}}(X_1+cdots+X_n-n)$ converges in distribution to a standard normal random variable $Z$, in particular, $P[Y_nleqslant 0]to P[Zleqslant0]$.



        Finally, $P[Zleqslant0]=frac12$ and $[N_nleqslant n]=[Y_nleqslant 0]$ hence $P[N_nleqslant n]tofrac12$, QED.





        The analytical way, completing your try:




        Hence, I know that what I need to do is to find $limlimits_{ntoinfty}I_n$, where
        $$
        I_n=frac{e^{-n}}{n!}int_{0}^n (n-t)^ne^tdt.$$




        To begin with, let $u(t)=(1-t)e^t$, then $I_n=dfrac{e^{-n}n^n}{n!}nJ_n$ with
        $$
        J_n=int_{0}^1 u(t)^nmathrm dt.
        $$
        Now, $u(t)leqslantmathrm e^{-t^2/2}$ hence
        $$
        J_nleqslantint_0^1mathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dtleqslantint_0^inftymathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dt=sqrt{frac{pi}{2n}}.
        $$
        Likewise, the function $tmapsto u(t)mathrm e^{t^2/2}$ is decreasing on $tgeqslant0$ hence $u(t)geqslant c_nmathrm e^{-t^2/2}$ on $tleqslant1/n^{1/4}$, with $c_n=u(1/n^{1/4})mathrm e^{-1/(2sqrt{n})}$, hence
        $$
        J_ngeqslant c_nint_0^{1/n^{1/4}}mathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dt=frac{c_n}{sqrt{n}}int_0^{n^{1/4}}mathrm e^{-t^2/2}mathrm dt=frac{c_n}{sqrt{n}}sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}(1+o(1)).
        $$
        Since $c_nto1$, all this proves that $sqrt{n}J_ntosqrt{fracpi2}$. Stirling formula shows that the prefactor $frac{e^{-n}n^n}{n!}$ is equivalent to $frac1{sqrt{2pi n}}$. Regrouping everything, one sees that $I_nsimfrac1{sqrt{2pi n}}nsqrt{fracpi{2n}}=frac12$.




        Moral:
        The probabilistic way is shorter, easier, more illuminating, and more fun.



        Caveat:
        My advice in these matters is, clearly, horribly biased.







        share|cite|improve this answer


























          124












          124








          124







          The probabilistic way:




          This is $P[N_nleqslant n]$ where $N_n$ is a random variable with Poisson distribution of parameter $n$. Hence each $N_n$ is distributed like $X_1+cdots+X_n$ where the random variables $(X_k)$ are independent and identically distributed with Poisson distribution of parameter $1$.



          By the central limit theorem, $Y_n=frac1{sqrt{n}}(X_1+cdots+X_n-n)$ converges in distribution to a standard normal random variable $Z$, in particular, $P[Y_nleqslant 0]to P[Zleqslant0]$.



          Finally, $P[Zleqslant0]=frac12$ and $[N_nleqslant n]=[Y_nleqslant 0]$ hence $P[N_nleqslant n]tofrac12$, QED.





          The analytical way, completing your try:




          Hence, I know that what I need to do is to find $limlimits_{ntoinfty}I_n$, where
          $$
          I_n=frac{e^{-n}}{n!}int_{0}^n (n-t)^ne^tdt.$$




          To begin with, let $u(t)=(1-t)e^t$, then $I_n=dfrac{e^{-n}n^n}{n!}nJ_n$ with
          $$
          J_n=int_{0}^1 u(t)^nmathrm dt.
          $$
          Now, $u(t)leqslantmathrm e^{-t^2/2}$ hence
          $$
          J_nleqslantint_0^1mathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dtleqslantint_0^inftymathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dt=sqrt{frac{pi}{2n}}.
          $$
          Likewise, the function $tmapsto u(t)mathrm e^{t^2/2}$ is decreasing on $tgeqslant0$ hence $u(t)geqslant c_nmathrm e^{-t^2/2}$ on $tleqslant1/n^{1/4}$, with $c_n=u(1/n^{1/4})mathrm e^{-1/(2sqrt{n})}$, hence
          $$
          J_ngeqslant c_nint_0^{1/n^{1/4}}mathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dt=frac{c_n}{sqrt{n}}int_0^{n^{1/4}}mathrm e^{-t^2/2}mathrm dt=frac{c_n}{sqrt{n}}sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}(1+o(1)).
          $$
          Since $c_nto1$, all this proves that $sqrt{n}J_ntosqrt{fracpi2}$. Stirling formula shows that the prefactor $frac{e^{-n}n^n}{n!}$ is equivalent to $frac1{sqrt{2pi n}}$. Regrouping everything, one sees that $I_nsimfrac1{sqrt{2pi n}}nsqrt{fracpi{2n}}=frac12$.




          Moral:
          The probabilistic way is shorter, easier, more illuminating, and more fun.



          Caveat:
          My advice in these matters is, clearly, horribly biased.







          share|cite|improve this answer















          The probabilistic way:




          This is $P[N_nleqslant n]$ where $N_n$ is a random variable with Poisson distribution of parameter $n$. Hence each $N_n$ is distributed like $X_1+cdots+X_n$ where the random variables $(X_k)$ are independent and identically distributed with Poisson distribution of parameter $1$.



          By the central limit theorem, $Y_n=frac1{sqrt{n}}(X_1+cdots+X_n-n)$ converges in distribution to a standard normal random variable $Z$, in particular, $P[Y_nleqslant 0]to P[Zleqslant0]$.



          Finally, $P[Zleqslant0]=frac12$ and $[N_nleqslant n]=[Y_nleqslant 0]$ hence $P[N_nleqslant n]tofrac12$, QED.





          The analytical way, completing your try:




          Hence, I know that what I need to do is to find $limlimits_{ntoinfty}I_n$, where
          $$
          I_n=frac{e^{-n}}{n!}int_{0}^n (n-t)^ne^tdt.$$




          To begin with, let $u(t)=(1-t)e^t$, then $I_n=dfrac{e^{-n}n^n}{n!}nJ_n$ with
          $$
          J_n=int_{0}^1 u(t)^nmathrm dt.
          $$
          Now, $u(t)leqslantmathrm e^{-t^2/2}$ hence
          $$
          J_nleqslantint_0^1mathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dtleqslantint_0^inftymathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dt=sqrt{frac{pi}{2n}}.
          $$
          Likewise, the function $tmapsto u(t)mathrm e^{t^2/2}$ is decreasing on $tgeqslant0$ hence $u(t)geqslant c_nmathrm e^{-t^2/2}$ on $tleqslant1/n^{1/4}$, with $c_n=u(1/n^{1/4})mathrm e^{-1/(2sqrt{n})}$, hence
          $$
          J_ngeqslant c_nint_0^{1/n^{1/4}}mathrm e^{-nt^2/2}mathrm dt=frac{c_n}{sqrt{n}}int_0^{n^{1/4}}mathrm e^{-t^2/2}mathrm dt=frac{c_n}{sqrt{n}}sqrt{frac{pi}{2}}(1+o(1)).
          $$
          Since $c_nto1$, all this proves that $sqrt{n}J_ntosqrt{fracpi2}$. Stirling formula shows that the prefactor $frac{e^{-n}n^n}{n!}$ is equivalent to $frac1{sqrt{2pi n}}$. Regrouping everything, one sees that $I_nsimfrac1{sqrt{2pi n}}nsqrt{fracpi{2n}}=frac12$.




          Moral:
          The probabilistic way is shorter, easier, more illuminating, and more fun.



          Caveat:
          My advice in these matters is, clearly, horribly biased.








          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Jul 4 '17 at 11:19

























          answered Sep 14 '13 at 15:40









          Did

          246k23220454




          246k23220454























              46














              Integration by parts yields
              $$
              frac{1}{k!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^k,mathrm{d}t=frac{1}{k!}x^ke^{-x}+frac{1}{(k-1)!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^{k-1},mathrm{d}ttag{1}
              $$
              Iterating $(1)$ gives
              $$
              frac{1}{n!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t=e^{-x}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{x^k}{k!}tag{2}
              $$
              Thus, we get
              $$
              e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!}=frac{1}{n!}int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}ttag{3}
              $$
              Now, I will reproduce part of the argument I give here, which develops a full asymptotic expansion. Additionally, I include some error estimates that were previously missing.
              $$
              begin{align}
              int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t
              &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-ns},(s+1)^n,mathrm{d}s\
              &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-n(s-log(1+s)},mathrm{d}s\
              &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}utag{4}
              end{align}
              $$
              where $t=n(s+1)$ and $u^2/2=s-log(1+s)$.



              Note that $frac{ss'}{1+s}=u$; thus, when $sge1$, $s'le2u$. This leads to the bound
              $$
              begin{align}
              int_{sge1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u
              &leint_{3/4}^infty e^{-nu^2/2},2u,mathrm{d}u\
              &=frac2ne^{-frac98n}tag{5}
              end{align}
              $$
              $(5)$ also show that
              $$
              int_{sge1}e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}ulefrac2ne^{-frac98n}tag{6}
              $$



              For $|s|<1$, we get
              $$
              u^2/2=s-log(1+s)=s^2/2-s^3/3+s^4/4-dotstag{7}
              $$
              We can invert the series to get $s'=1+frac23u+O(u^2)$. Therefore,
              $$
              begin{align}
              int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u
              &=int_{sin[0,1]} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u+color{red}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u}\
              &=int_0^inftyleft(1+frac23uright)e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}u-color{darkorange}{int_{s>1}left(1+frac23uright)e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}u}\
              &+int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},O(u^2),mathrm{d}u-color{darkorange}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},O(u^2),mathrm{d}u}\
              &+color{red}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u}\
              &=sqrt{frac{pi}{2n}}+frac2{3n}+Oleft(n^{-3/2}right)tag{8}
              end{align}
              $$
              The red and orange integrals decrease exponentially by $(5)$ and $(6)$.



              Plugging $(8)$ into $(4)$ yields
              $$
              int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t=left(sqrt{frac{pi n}{2}}+frac23right),n^ne^{-n}+O(n^{n-1/2}e^{-n})tag{9}
              $$
              The argument above can be used to prove Stirling's approximation, which says that
              $$
              n!=sqrt{2pi n},n^ne^{-n}+O(n^{n-1/2}e^{-n})tag{10}
              $$
              Combining $(9)$ and $(10)$ yields
              $$
              begin{align}
              e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!}
              &=frac{1}{n!}int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t\
              &=frac12+frac{2/3}{sqrt{2pi n}}+O(n^{-1})tag{11}
              end{align}
              $$






              share|cite|improve this answer



















              • 1




                Would the downvoter care to comment (he asked, expecting the answer "no")?
                – robjohn
                May 12 '18 at 14:01












              • hey rob, sadly the link in your answer is dead :(
                – tired
                Jun 10 '18 at 14:17










              • Yeah too many downvoters here :/ I upvoted this. Very Nice answer.
                – mick
                Jun 29 '18 at 21:49
















              46














              Integration by parts yields
              $$
              frac{1}{k!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^k,mathrm{d}t=frac{1}{k!}x^ke^{-x}+frac{1}{(k-1)!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^{k-1},mathrm{d}ttag{1}
              $$
              Iterating $(1)$ gives
              $$
              frac{1}{n!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t=e^{-x}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{x^k}{k!}tag{2}
              $$
              Thus, we get
              $$
              e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!}=frac{1}{n!}int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}ttag{3}
              $$
              Now, I will reproduce part of the argument I give here, which develops a full asymptotic expansion. Additionally, I include some error estimates that were previously missing.
              $$
              begin{align}
              int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t
              &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-ns},(s+1)^n,mathrm{d}s\
              &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-n(s-log(1+s)},mathrm{d}s\
              &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}utag{4}
              end{align}
              $$
              where $t=n(s+1)$ and $u^2/2=s-log(1+s)$.



              Note that $frac{ss'}{1+s}=u$; thus, when $sge1$, $s'le2u$. This leads to the bound
              $$
              begin{align}
              int_{sge1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u
              &leint_{3/4}^infty e^{-nu^2/2},2u,mathrm{d}u\
              &=frac2ne^{-frac98n}tag{5}
              end{align}
              $$
              $(5)$ also show that
              $$
              int_{sge1}e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}ulefrac2ne^{-frac98n}tag{6}
              $$



              For $|s|<1$, we get
              $$
              u^2/2=s-log(1+s)=s^2/2-s^3/3+s^4/4-dotstag{7}
              $$
              We can invert the series to get $s'=1+frac23u+O(u^2)$. Therefore,
              $$
              begin{align}
              int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u
              &=int_{sin[0,1]} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u+color{red}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u}\
              &=int_0^inftyleft(1+frac23uright)e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}u-color{darkorange}{int_{s>1}left(1+frac23uright)e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}u}\
              &+int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},O(u^2),mathrm{d}u-color{darkorange}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},O(u^2),mathrm{d}u}\
              &+color{red}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u}\
              &=sqrt{frac{pi}{2n}}+frac2{3n}+Oleft(n^{-3/2}right)tag{8}
              end{align}
              $$
              The red and orange integrals decrease exponentially by $(5)$ and $(6)$.



              Plugging $(8)$ into $(4)$ yields
              $$
              int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t=left(sqrt{frac{pi n}{2}}+frac23right),n^ne^{-n}+O(n^{n-1/2}e^{-n})tag{9}
              $$
              The argument above can be used to prove Stirling's approximation, which says that
              $$
              n!=sqrt{2pi n},n^ne^{-n}+O(n^{n-1/2}e^{-n})tag{10}
              $$
              Combining $(9)$ and $(10)$ yields
              $$
              begin{align}
              e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!}
              &=frac{1}{n!}int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t\
              &=frac12+frac{2/3}{sqrt{2pi n}}+O(n^{-1})tag{11}
              end{align}
              $$






              share|cite|improve this answer



















              • 1




                Would the downvoter care to comment (he asked, expecting the answer "no")?
                – robjohn
                May 12 '18 at 14:01












              • hey rob, sadly the link in your answer is dead :(
                – tired
                Jun 10 '18 at 14:17










              • Yeah too many downvoters here :/ I upvoted this. Very Nice answer.
                – mick
                Jun 29 '18 at 21:49














              46












              46








              46






              Integration by parts yields
              $$
              frac{1}{k!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^k,mathrm{d}t=frac{1}{k!}x^ke^{-x}+frac{1}{(k-1)!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^{k-1},mathrm{d}ttag{1}
              $$
              Iterating $(1)$ gives
              $$
              frac{1}{n!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t=e^{-x}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{x^k}{k!}tag{2}
              $$
              Thus, we get
              $$
              e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!}=frac{1}{n!}int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}ttag{3}
              $$
              Now, I will reproduce part of the argument I give here, which develops a full asymptotic expansion. Additionally, I include some error estimates that were previously missing.
              $$
              begin{align}
              int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t
              &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-ns},(s+1)^n,mathrm{d}s\
              &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-n(s-log(1+s)},mathrm{d}s\
              &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}utag{4}
              end{align}
              $$
              where $t=n(s+1)$ and $u^2/2=s-log(1+s)$.



              Note that $frac{ss'}{1+s}=u$; thus, when $sge1$, $s'le2u$. This leads to the bound
              $$
              begin{align}
              int_{sge1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u
              &leint_{3/4}^infty e^{-nu^2/2},2u,mathrm{d}u\
              &=frac2ne^{-frac98n}tag{5}
              end{align}
              $$
              $(5)$ also show that
              $$
              int_{sge1}e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}ulefrac2ne^{-frac98n}tag{6}
              $$



              For $|s|<1$, we get
              $$
              u^2/2=s-log(1+s)=s^2/2-s^3/3+s^4/4-dotstag{7}
              $$
              We can invert the series to get $s'=1+frac23u+O(u^2)$. Therefore,
              $$
              begin{align}
              int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u
              &=int_{sin[0,1]} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u+color{red}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u}\
              &=int_0^inftyleft(1+frac23uright)e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}u-color{darkorange}{int_{s>1}left(1+frac23uright)e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}u}\
              &+int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},O(u^2),mathrm{d}u-color{darkorange}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},O(u^2),mathrm{d}u}\
              &+color{red}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u}\
              &=sqrt{frac{pi}{2n}}+frac2{3n}+Oleft(n^{-3/2}right)tag{8}
              end{align}
              $$
              The red and orange integrals decrease exponentially by $(5)$ and $(6)$.



              Plugging $(8)$ into $(4)$ yields
              $$
              int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t=left(sqrt{frac{pi n}{2}}+frac23right),n^ne^{-n}+O(n^{n-1/2}e^{-n})tag{9}
              $$
              The argument above can be used to prove Stirling's approximation, which says that
              $$
              n!=sqrt{2pi n},n^ne^{-n}+O(n^{n-1/2}e^{-n})tag{10}
              $$
              Combining $(9)$ and $(10)$ yields
              $$
              begin{align}
              e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!}
              &=frac{1}{n!}int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t\
              &=frac12+frac{2/3}{sqrt{2pi n}}+O(n^{-1})tag{11}
              end{align}
              $$






              share|cite|improve this answer














              Integration by parts yields
              $$
              frac{1}{k!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^k,mathrm{d}t=frac{1}{k!}x^ke^{-x}+frac{1}{(k-1)!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^{k-1},mathrm{d}ttag{1}
              $$
              Iterating $(1)$ gives
              $$
              frac{1}{n!}int_x^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t=e^{-x}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{x^k}{k!}tag{2}
              $$
              Thus, we get
              $$
              e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!}=frac{1}{n!}int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}ttag{3}
              $$
              Now, I will reproduce part of the argument I give here, which develops a full asymptotic expansion. Additionally, I include some error estimates that were previously missing.
              $$
              begin{align}
              int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t
              &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-ns},(s+1)^n,mathrm{d}s\
              &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-n(s-log(1+s)},mathrm{d}s\
              &=n^{n+1}e^{-n}int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}utag{4}
              end{align}
              $$
              where $t=n(s+1)$ and $u^2/2=s-log(1+s)$.



              Note that $frac{ss'}{1+s}=u$; thus, when $sge1$, $s'le2u$. This leads to the bound
              $$
              begin{align}
              int_{sge1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u
              &leint_{3/4}^infty e^{-nu^2/2},2u,mathrm{d}u\
              &=frac2ne^{-frac98n}tag{5}
              end{align}
              $$
              $(5)$ also show that
              $$
              int_{sge1}e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}ulefrac2ne^{-frac98n}tag{6}
              $$



              For $|s|<1$, we get
              $$
              u^2/2=s-log(1+s)=s^2/2-s^3/3+s^4/4-dotstag{7}
              $$
              We can invert the series to get $s'=1+frac23u+O(u^2)$. Therefore,
              $$
              begin{align}
              int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u
              &=int_{sin[0,1]} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u+color{red}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u}\
              &=int_0^inftyleft(1+frac23uright)e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}u-color{darkorange}{int_{s>1}left(1+frac23uright)e^{-nu^2/2},mathrm{d}u}\
              &+int_0^infty e^{-nu^2/2},O(u^2),mathrm{d}u-color{darkorange}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},O(u^2),mathrm{d}u}\
              &+color{red}{int_{s>1} e^{-nu^2/2},s',mathrm{d}u}\
              &=sqrt{frac{pi}{2n}}+frac2{3n}+Oleft(n^{-3/2}right)tag{8}
              end{align}
              $$
              The red and orange integrals decrease exponentially by $(5)$ and $(6)$.



              Plugging $(8)$ into $(4)$ yields
              $$
              int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t=left(sqrt{frac{pi n}{2}}+frac23right),n^ne^{-n}+O(n^{n-1/2}e^{-n})tag{9}
              $$
              The argument above can be used to prove Stirling's approximation, which says that
              $$
              n!=sqrt{2pi n},n^ne^{-n}+O(n^{n-1/2}e^{-n})tag{10}
              $$
              Combining $(9)$ and $(10)$ yields
              $$
              begin{align}
              e^{-n}sum_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!}
              &=frac{1}{n!}int_n^infty e^{-t},t^n,mathrm{d}t\
              &=frac12+frac{2/3}{sqrt{2pi n}}+O(n^{-1})tag{11}
              end{align}
              $$







              share|cite|improve this answer














              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer








              edited Oct 29 '13 at 1:32

























              answered Jun 19 '12 at 15:29









              robjohn

              264k27303623




              264k27303623








              • 1




                Would the downvoter care to comment (he asked, expecting the answer "no")?
                – robjohn
                May 12 '18 at 14:01












              • hey rob, sadly the link in your answer is dead :(
                – tired
                Jun 10 '18 at 14:17










              • Yeah too many downvoters here :/ I upvoted this. Very Nice answer.
                – mick
                Jun 29 '18 at 21:49














              • 1




                Would the downvoter care to comment (he asked, expecting the answer "no")?
                – robjohn
                May 12 '18 at 14:01












              • hey rob, sadly the link in your answer is dead :(
                – tired
                Jun 10 '18 at 14:17










              • Yeah too many downvoters here :/ I upvoted this. Very Nice answer.
                – mick
                Jun 29 '18 at 21:49








              1




              1




              Would the downvoter care to comment (he asked, expecting the answer "no")?
              – robjohn
              May 12 '18 at 14:01






              Would the downvoter care to comment (he asked, expecting the answer "no")?
              – robjohn
              May 12 '18 at 14:01














              hey rob, sadly the link in your answer is dead :(
              – tired
              Jun 10 '18 at 14:17




              hey rob, sadly the link in your answer is dead :(
              – tired
              Jun 10 '18 at 14:17












              Yeah too many downvoters here :/ I upvoted this. Very Nice answer.
              – mick
              Jun 29 '18 at 21:49




              Yeah too many downvoters here :/ I upvoted this. Very Nice answer.
              – mick
              Jun 29 '18 at 21:49











              27














              If you'd like to see formal solution using calculus methods check this article http://www.emis.de/journals/AMAPN/vol15/voros.pdf






              share|cite|improve this answer

















              • 3




                I wish you had copied the article here. It seemed small enough. References have a habit of pointing to NULL over time.
                – steven gregory
                Aug 22 '15 at 5:18
















              27














              If you'd like to see formal solution using calculus methods check this article http://www.emis.de/journals/AMAPN/vol15/voros.pdf






              share|cite|improve this answer

















              • 3




                I wish you had copied the article here. It seemed small enough. References have a habit of pointing to NULL over time.
                – steven gregory
                Aug 22 '15 at 5:18














              27












              27








              27






              If you'd like to see formal solution using calculus methods check this article http://www.emis.de/journals/AMAPN/vol15/voros.pdf






              share|cite|improve this answer












              If you'd like to see formal solution using calculus methods check this article http://www.emis.de/journals/AMAPN/vol15/voros.pdf







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered Jun 19 '12 at 11:09









              qoqosz

              2,7471324




              2,7471324








              • 3




                I wish you had copied the article here. It seemed small enough. References have a habit of pointing to NULL over time.
                – steven gregory
                Aug 22 '15 at 5:18














              • 3




                I wish you had copied the article here. It seemed small enough. References have a habit of pointing to NULL over time.
                – steven gregory
                Aug 22 '15 at 5:18








              3




              3




              I wish you had copied the article here. It seemed small enough. References have a habit of pointing to NULL over time.
              – steven gregory
              Aug 22 '15 at 5:18




              I wish you had copied the article here. It seemed small enough. References have a habit of pointing to NULL over time.
              – steven gregory
              Aug 22 '15 at 5:18











              23














              The sum is related to the partial exponential sum, and thus to the incomplete gamma function,
              $$begin{eqnarray*}
              e^{-n} sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
              &=& e^{-n} e_n(n) \
              &=& frac{Gamma(n+1,n)}{Gamma(n+1)},
              end{eqnarray*}$$
              since $e_n(x) = sum_{k=0}^n x^k/k! = e^x Gamma(n+1,x)/Gamma(n+1)$.
              But
              $$begin{eqnarray*}
              Gamma(n+1,n) &=& sqrt{2pi}, n^{n+1/2}e^{-n}left(frac{1}{2} + frac{1}{3}sqrt{frac{2}{npi}} + Oleft(frac{1}{n}right) right).
              end{eqnarray*}$$
              The first term in the asymptotic expansion for $Gamma(n+1,n)$ can be found by applying the saddle point method to
              $$Gamma(n+1,n) = int_n^infty dt, t^n e^{-t}.$$
              The higher order terms are in principle straightforward to compute.
              Using Stirling's approximation, we find
              $$e^{-n} sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
              = frac{1}{2}
              + frac{1}{3}sqrt{frac{2}{npi}}
              + Oleft(frac{1}{n}right).$$
              Thus, the limit is $1/2$, as found by @sos440 and @robjohn.
              This limit is a special case of DLMF 8.11.13.



              I just noticed a comment that suggests this be done using high school level math.
              If this is a standard exercise at your high school, maybe they covered the incomplete gamma function! ;-)






              share|cite|improve this answer

















              • 2




                (+1) I derived this asymptotic expansion here in answer to a question on sci.math. I computed a few terms past $frac12$: $$ frac12+frac{1}{sqrt{2pi n}}left(frac23-frac{23}{270n}+frac{23}{3024n^2}+dotsright) $$
                – robjohn
                Jun 20 '12 at 3:14










              • @robjohn: Thanks for the link, I'll have a look. By the way, I voted up your nice solution a couple of hours ago. I like your short and sweet derivation of (3).
                – user26872
                Jun 20 '12 at 3:47










              • @robjohn As steven gregory says above "I wish you had copied the article here. It seemed small enough. References have a habit of pointing to NULL over time" . Please, could you upload somewhere again? I'm curious about it.
                – vesszabo
                Jul 4 '17 at 21:13
















              23














              The sum is related to the partial exponential sum, and thus to the incomplete gamma function,
              $$begin{eqnarray*}
              e^{-n} sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
              &=& e^{-n} e_n(n) \
              &=& frac{Gamma(n+1,n)}{Gamma(n+1)},
              end{eqnarray*}$$
              since $e_n(x) = sum_{k=0}^n x^k/k! = e^x Gamma(n+1,x)/Gamma(n+1)$.
              But
              $$begin{eqnarray*}
              Gamma(n+1,n) &=& sqrt{2pi}, n^{n+1/2}e^{-n}left(frac{1}{2} + frac{1}{3}sqrt{frac{2}{npi}} + Oleft(frac{1}{n}right) right).
              end{eqnarray*}$$
              The first term in the asymptotic expansion for $Gamma(n+1,n)$ can be found by applying the saddle point method to
              $$Gamma(n+1,n) = int_n^infty dt, t^n e^{-t}.$$
              The higher order terms are in principle straightforward to compute.
              Using Stirling's approximation, we find
              $$e^{-n} sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
              = frac{1}{2}
              + frac{1}{3}sqrt{frac{2}{npi}}
              + Oleft(frac{1}{n}right).$$
              Thus, the limit is $1/2$, as found by @sos440 and @robjohn.
              This limit is a special case of DLMF 8.11.13.



              I just noticed a comment that suggests this be done using high school level math.
              If this is a standard exercise at your high school, maybe they covered the incomplete gamma function! ;-)






              share|cite|improve this answer

















              • 2




                (+1) I derived this asymptotic expansion here in answer to a question on sci.math. I computed a few terms past $frac12$: $$ frac12+frac{1}{sqrt{2pi n}}left(frac23-frac{23}{270n}+frac{23}{3024n^2}+dotsright) $$
                – robjohn
                Jun 20 '12 at 3:14










              • @robjohn: Thanks for the link, I'll have a look. By the way, I voted up your nice solution a couple of hours ago. I like your short and sweet derivation of (3).
                – user26872
                Jun 20 '12 at 3:47










              • @robjohn As steven gregory says above "I wish you had copied the article here. It seemed small enough. References have a habit of pointing to NULL over time" . Please, could you upload somewhere again? I'm curious about it.
                – vesszabo
                Jul 4 '17 at 21:13














              23












              23








              23






              The sum is related to the partial exponential sum, and thus to the incomplete gamma function,
              $$begin{eqnarray*}
              e^{-n} sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
              &=& e^{-n} e_n(n) \
              &=& frac{Gamma(n+1,n)}{Gamma(n+1)},
              end{eqnarray*}$$
              since $e_n(x) = sum_{k=0}^n x^k/k! = e^x Gamma(n+1,x)/Gamma(n+1)$.
              But
              $$begin{eqnarray*}
              Gamma(n+1,n) &=& sqrt{2pi}, n^{n+1/2}e^{-n}left(frac{1}{2} + frac{1}{3}sqrt{frac{2}{npi}} + Oleft(frac{1}{n}right) right).
              end{eqnarray*}$$
              The first term in the asymptotic expansion for $Gamma(n+1,n)$ can be found by applying the saddle point method to
              $$Gamma(n+1,n) = int_n^infty dt, t^n e^{-t}.$$
              The higher order terms are in principle straightforward to compute.
              Using Stirling's approximation, we find
              $$e^{-n} sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
              = frac{1}{2}
              + frac{1}{3}sqrt{frac{2}{npi}}
              + Oleft(frac{1}{n}right).$$
              Thus, the limit is $1/2$, as found by @sos440 and @robjohn.
              This limit is a special case of DLMF 8.11.13.



              I just noticed a comment that suggests this be done using high school level math.
              If this is a standard exercise at your high school, maybe they covered the incomplete gamma function! ;-)






              share|cite|improve this answer












              The sum is related to the partial exponential sum, and thus to the incomplete gamma function,
              $$begin{eqnarray*}
              e^{-n} sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
              &=& e^{-n} e_n(n) \
              &=& frac{Gamma(n+1,n)}{Gamma(n+1)},
              end{eqnarray*}$$
              since $e_n(x) = sum_{k=0}^n x^k/k! = e^x Gamma(n+1,x)/Gamma(n+1)$.
              But
              $$begin{eqnarray*}
              Gamma(n+1,n) &=& sqrt{2pi}, n^{n+1/2}e^{-n}left(frac{1}{2} + frac{1}{3}sqrt{frac{2}{npi}} + Oleft(frac{1}{n}right) right).
              end{eqnarray*}$$
              The first term in the asymptotic expansion for $Gamma(n+1,n)$ can be found by applying the saddle point method to
              $$Gamma(n+1,n) = int_n^infty dt, t^n e^{-t}.$$
              The higher order terms are in principle straightforward to compute.
              Using Stirling's approximation, we find
              $$e^{-n} sum_{k=0}^{n} frac{n^k}{k!}
              = frac{1}{2}
              + frac{1}{3}sqrt{frac{2}{npi}}
              + Oleft(frac{1}{n}right).$$
              Thus, the limit is $1/2$, as found by @sos440 and @robjohn.
              This limit is a special case of DLMF 8.11.13.



              I just noticed a comment that suggests this be done using high school level math.
              If this is a standard exercise at your high school, maybe they covered the incomplete gamma function! ;-)







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered Jun 20 '12 at 0:22









              user26872

              14.7k22773




              14.7k22773








              • 2




                (+1) I derived this asymptotic expansion here in answer to a question on sci.math. I computed a few terms past $frac12$: $$ frac12+frac{1}{sqrt{2pi n}}left(frac23-frac{23}{270n}+frac{23}{3024n^2}+dotsright) $$
                – robjohn
                Jun 20 '12 at 3:14










              • @robjohn: Thanks for the link, I'll have a look. By the way, I voted up your nice solution a couple of hours ago. I like your short and sweet derivation of (3).
                – user26872
                Jun 20 '12 at 3:47










              • @robjohn As steven gregory says above "I wish you had copied the article here. It seemed small enough. References have a habit of pointing to NULL over time" . Please, could you upload somewhere again? I'm curious about it.
                – vesszabo
                Jul 4 '17 at 21:13














              • 2




                (+1) I derived this asymptotic expansion here in answer to a question on sci.math. I computed a few terms past $frac12$: $$ frac12+frac{1}{sqrt{2pi n}}left(frac23-frac{23}{270n}+frac{23}{3024n^2}+dotsright) $$
                – robjohn
                Jun 20 '12 at 3:14










              • @robjohn: Thanks for the link, I'll have a look. By the way, I voted up your nice solution a couple of hours ago. I like your short and sweet derivation of (3).
                – user26872
                Jun 20 '12 at 3:47










              • @robjohn As steven gregory says above "I wish you had copied the article here. It seemed small enough. References have a habit of pointing to NULL over time" . Please, could you upload somewhere again? I'm curious about it.
                – vesszabo
                Jul 4 '17 at 21:13








              2




              2




              (+1) I derived this asymptotic expansion here in answer to a question on sci.math. I computed a few terms past $frac12$: $$ frac12+frac{1}{sqrt{2pi n}}left(frac23-frac{23}{270n}+frac{23}{3024n^2}+dotsright) $$
              – robjohn
              Jun 20 '12 at 3:14




              (+1) I derived this asymptotic expansion here in answer to a question on sci.math. I computed a few terms past $frac12$: $$ frac12+frac{1}{sqrt{2pi n}}left(frac23-frac{23}{270n}+frac{23}{3024n^2}+dotsright) $$
              – robjohn
              Jun 20 '12 at 3:14












              @robjohn: Thanks for the link, I'll have a look. By the way, I voted up your nice solution a couple of hours ago. I like your short and sweet derivation of (3).
              – user26872
              Jun 20 '12 at 3:47




              @robjohn: Thanks for the link, I'll have a look. By the way, I voted up your nice solution a couple of hours ago. I like your short and sweet derivation of (3).
              – user26872
              Jun 20 '12 at 3:47












              @robjohn As steven gregory says above "I wish you had copied the article here. It seemed small enough. References have a habit of pointing to NULL over time" . Please, could you upload somewhere again? I'm curious about it.
              – vesszabo
              Jul 4 '17 at 21:13




              @robjohn As steven gregory says above "I wish you had copied the article here. It seemed small enough. References have a habit of pointing to NULL over time" . Please, could you upload somewhere again? I'm curious about it.
              – vesszabo
              Jul 4 '17 at 21:13











              21














              $newcommand{+}{^{dagger}}
              newcommand{angles}[1]{leftlangle #1 rightrangle}
              newcommand{braces}[1]{leftlbrace #1 rightrbrace}
              newcommand{bracks}[1]{leftlbrack #1 rightrbrack}
              newcommand{dd}{{rm d}}
              newcommand{isdiv}{,left.rightvert,}
              newcommand{ds}[1]{displaystyle{#1}}
              newcommand{equalby}[1]{{#1 atop {= atop vphantom{huge A}}}}
              newcommand{expo}[1]{,{rm e}^{#1},}
              newcommand{floor}[1]{,leftlfloor #1 rightrfloor,}
              newcommand{half}{{1 over 2}}
              newcommand{ic}{{rm i}}
              newcommand{imp}{Longrightarrow}
              newcommand{ket}[1]{leftvert #1rightrangle}
              newcommand{pars}[1]{left( #1 right)}
              newcommand{partiald}[3]{frac{partial^{#1} #2}{partial #3^{#1}}}
              newcommand{pp}{{cal P}}
              newcommand{root}[2]{,sqrt[#1]{,#2,},}
              newcommand{sech}{,{rm sech}}
              newcommand{sgn}{,{rm sgn}}
              newcommand{totald}[3]{frac{{rm d}^{#1} #2}{{rm d} #3^{#1}}}
              newcommand{ul}[1]{underline{#1}}
              newcommand{verts}[1]{leftvert #1 rightvert}
              newcommand{yy}{Longleftrightarrow}$
              begin{align}&color{#00f}{
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}{n^{k} over k!}}}
              \[3mm]&=lim_{n to infty}bracks{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
              exppars{klnpars{n} - lnpars{k!}}}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}braces{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
              exppars{nlnpars{n} - lnpars{n!} - {1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}}}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}braces{expo{-n},{n^{n} over n!}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
              exppars{-{1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}}}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}braces{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!}int_{0}^{n}
              exppars{-{1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}},dd k}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!}int_{-n}^{0}
              exppars{-,{k^{2} over 2n}},dd k}
              =
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!},root{2n}
              int_{-root{n}/2}^{0}exppars{-k^{2}},dd k}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}
              int_{-infty}^{0}exppars{-k^{2}},dd k}
              =
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}
              ,{root{pi} over 2}}
              \[3mm]&=
              half,lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2pi}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}}
              =color{#00f}{Largehalf}
              end{align}






              share|cite|improve this answer



















              • 15




                The second equal sign is a complete mystery. The passage from a sum to an integral also needs justification but it probably holds.
                – Did
                Mar 31 '14 at 16:25








              • 9




                Would you care answering @Did 's question regarding the second equal sign? I am miffed as well. Thank you, Felix Marin.
                – Hans
                May 11 '15 at 17:35






              • 4




                @Did's question has to be answered otherwise this seems to be an suitable answer
                – tired
                Oct 4 '15 at 12:12






              • 3




                yeah for me too, can you please answer @Did 's question?
                – user153330
                Mar 1 '16 at 20:40








              • 1




                Is this supposed to justify the various unsubstantiated claims this post relies on? It does not.
                – Did
                Feb 8 '18 at 17:56
















              21














              $newcommand{+}{^{dagger}}
              newcommand{angles}[1]{leftlangle #1 rightrangle}
              newcommand{braces}[1]{leftlbrace #1 rightrbrace}
              newcommand{bracks}[1]{leftlbrack #1 rightrbrack}
              newcommand{dd}{{rm d}}
              newcommand{isdiv}{,left.rightvert,}
              newcommand{ds}[1]{displaystyle{#1}}
              newcommand{equalby}[1]{{#1 atop {= atop vphantom{huge A}}}}
              newcommand{expo}[1]{,{rm e}^{#1},}
              newcommand{floor}[1]{,leftlfloor #1 rightrfloor,}
              newcommand{half}{{1 over 2}}
              newcommand{ic}{{rm i}}
              newcommand{imp}{Longrightarrow}
              newcommand{ket}[1]{leftvert #1rightrangle}
              newcommand{pars}[1]{left( #1 right)}
              newcommand{partiald}[3]{frac{partial^{#1} #2}{partial #3^{#1}}}
              newcommand{pp}{{cal P}}
              newcommand{root}[2]{,sqrt[#1]{,#2,},}
              newcommand{sech}{,{rm sech}}
              newcommand{sgn}{,{rm sgn}}
              newcommand{totald}[3]{frac{{rm d}^{#1} #2}{{rm d} #3^{#1}}}
              newcommand{ul}[1]{underline{#1}}
              newcommand{verts}[1]{leftvert #1 rightvert}
              newcommand{yy}{Longleftrightarrow}$
              begin{align}&color{#00f}{
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}{n^{k} over k!}}}
              \[3mm]&=lim_{n to infty}bracks{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
              exppars{klnpars{n} - lnpars{k!}}}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}braces{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
              exppars{nlnpars{n} - lnpars{n!} - {1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}}}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}braces{expo{-n},{n^{n} over n!}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
              exppars{-{1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}}}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}braces{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!}int_{0}^{n}
              exppars{-{1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}},dd k}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!}int_{-n}^{0}
              exppars{-,{k^{2} over 2n}},dd k}
              =
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!},root{2n}
              int_{-root{n}/2}^{0}exppars{-k^{2}},dd k}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}
              int_{-infty}^{0}exppars{-k^{2}},dd k}
              =
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}
              ,{root{pi} over 2}}
              \[3mm]&=
              half,lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2pi}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}}
              =color{#00f}{Largehalf}
              end{align}






              share|cite|improve this answer



















              • 15




                The second equal sign is a complete mystery. The passage from a sum to an integral also needs justification but it probably holds.
                – Did
                Mar 31 '14 at 16:25








              • 9




                Would you care answering @Did 's question regarding the second equal sign? I am miffed as well. Thank you, Felix Marin.
                – Hans
                May 11 '15 at 17:35






              • 4




                @Did's question has to be answered otherwise this seems to be an suitable answer
                – tired
                Oct 4 '15 at 12:12






              • 3




                yeah for me too, can you please answer @Did 's question?
                – user153330
                Mar 1 '16 at 20:40








              • 1




                Is this supposed to justify the various unsubstantiated claims this post relies on? It does not.
                – Did
                Feb 8 '18 at 17:56














              21












              21








              21






              $newcommand{+}{^{dagger}}
              newcommand{angles}[1]{leftlangle #1 rightrangle}
              newcommand{braces}[1]{leftlbrace #1 rightrbrace}
              newcommand{bracks}[1]{leftlbrack #1 rightrbrack}
              newcommand{dd}{{rm d}}
              newcommand{isdiv}{,left.rightvert,}
              newcommand{ds}[1]{displaystyle{#1}}
              newcommand{equalby}[1]{{#1 atop {= atop vphantom{huge A}}}}
              newcommand{expo}[1]{,{rm e}^{#1},}
              newcommand{floor}[1]{,leftlfloor #1 rightrfloor,}
              newcommand{half}{{1 over 2}}
              newcommand{ic}{{rm i}}
              newcommand{imp}{Longrightarrow}
              newcommand{ket}[1]{leftvert #1rightrangle}
              newcommand{pars}[1]{left( #1 right)}
              newcommand{partiald}[3]{frac{partial^{#1} #2}{partial #3^{#1}}}
              newcommand{pp}{{cal P}}
              newcommand{root}[2]{,sqrt[#1]{,#2,},}
              newcommand{sech}{,{rm sech}}
              newcommand{sgn}{,{rm sgn}}
              newcommand{totald}[3]{frac{{rm d}^{#1} #2}{{rm d} #3^{#1}}}
              newcommand{ul}[1]{underline{#1}}
              newcommand{verts}[1]{leftvert #1 rightvert}
              newcommand{yy}{Longleftrightarrow}$
              begin{align}&color{#00f}{
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}{n^{k} over k!}}}
              \[3mm]&=lim_{n to infty}bracks{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
              exppars{klnpars{n} - lnpars{k!}}}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}braces{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
              exppars{nlnpars{n} - lnpars{n!} - {1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}}}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}braces{expo{-n},{n^{n} over n!}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
              exppars{-{1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}}}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}braces{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!}int_{0}^{n}
              exppars{-{1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}},dd k}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!}int_{-n}^{0}
              exppars{-,{k^{2} over 2n}},dd k}
              =
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!},root{2n}
              int_{-root{n}/2}^{0}exppars{-k^{2}},dd k}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}
              int_{-infty}^{0}exppars{-k^{2}},dd k}
              =
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}
              ,{root{pi} over 2}}
              \[3mm]&=
              half,lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2pi}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}}
              =color{#00f}{Largehalf}
              end{align}






              share|cite|improve this answer














              $newcommand{+}{^{dagger}}
              newcommand{angles}[1]{leftlangle #1 rightrangle}
              newcommand{braces}[1]{leftlbrace #1 rightrbrace}
              newcommand{bracks}[1]{leftlbrack #1 rightrbrack}
              newcommand{dd}{{rm d}}
              newcommand{isdiv}{,left.rightvert,}
              newcommand{ds}[1]{displaystyle{#1}}
              newcommand{equalby}[1]{{#1 atop {= atop vphantom{huge A}}}}
              newcommand{expo}[1]{,{rm e}^{#1},}
              newcommand{floor}[1]{,leftlfloor #1 rightrfloor,}
              newcommand{half}{{1 over 2}}
              newcommand{ic}{{rm i}}
              newcommand{imp}{Longrightarrow}
              newcommand{ket}[1]{leftvert #1rightrangle}
              newcommand{pars}[1]{left( #1 right)}
              newcommand{partiald}[3]{frac{partial^{#1} #2}{partial #3^{#1}}}
              newcommand{pp}{{cal P}}
              newcommand{root}[2]{,sqrt[#1]{,#2,},}
              newcommand{sech}{,{rm sech}}
              newcommand{sgn}{,{rm sgn}}
              newcommand{totald}[3]{frac{{rm d}^{#1} #2}{{rm d} #3^{#1}}}
              newcommand{ul}[1]{underline{#1}}
              newcommand{verts}[1]{leftvert #1 rightvert}
              newcommand{yy}{Longleftrightarrow}$
              begin{align}&color{#00f}{
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}{n^{k} over k!}}}
              \[3mm]&=lim_{n to infty}bracks{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
              exppars{klnpars{n} - lnpars{k!}}}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}braces{expo{-n}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
              exppars{nlnpars{n} - lnpars{n!} - {1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}}}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}braces{expo{-n},{n^{n} over n!}sum_{k = 0}^{n}
              exppars{-{1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}}}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}braces{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!}int_{0}^{n}
              exppars{-{1 over 2n}bracks{k - n}^{2}},dd k}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!}int_{-n}^{0}
              exppars{-,{k^{2} over 2n}},dd k}
              =
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{expo{-n}n^{n} over n!},root{2n}
              int_{-root{n}/2}^{0}exppars{-k^{2}},dd k}
              \[3mm]&=
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}
              int_{-infty}^{0}exppars{-k^{2}},dd k}
              =
              lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}
              ,{root{pi} over 2}}
              \[3mm]&=
              half,lim_{n to infty}bracks{{root{2pi}n^{n + 1/2}expo{-n} over n!}}
              =color{#00f}{Largehalf}
              end{align}







              share|cite|improve this answer














              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer








              edited May 25 '15 at 4:02









              Lucian

              41k159130




              41k159130










              answered Nov 12 '13 at 15:20









              Felix Marin

              67.1k7107141




              67.1k7107141








              • 15




                The second equal sign is a complete mystery. The passage from a sum to an integral also needs justification but it probably holds.
                – Did
                Mar 31 '14 at 16:25








              • 9




                Would you care answering @Did 's question regarding the second equal sign? I am miffed as well. Thank you, Felix Marin.
                – Hans
                May 11 '15 at 17:35






              • 4




                @Did's question has to be answered otherwise this seems to be an suitable answer
                – tired
                Oct 4 '15 at 12:12






              • 3




                yeah for me too, can you please answer @Did 's question?
                – user153330
                Mar 1 '16 at 20:40








              • 1




                Is this supposed to justify the various unsubstantiated claims this post relies on? It does not.
                – Did
                Feb 8 '18 at 17:56














              • 15




                The second equal sign is a complete mystery. The passage from a sum to an integral also needs justification but it probably holds.
                – Did
                Mar 31 '14 at 16:25








              • 9




                Would you care answering @Did 's question regarding the second equal sign? I am miffed as well. Thank you, Felix Marin.
                – Hans
                May 11 '15 at 17:35






              • 4




                @Did's question has to be answered otherwise this seems to be an suitable answer
                – tired
                Oct 4 '15 at 12:12






              • 3




                yeah for me too, can you please answer @Did 's question?
                – user153330
                Mar 1 '16 at 20:40








              • 1




                Is this supposed to justify the various unsubstantiated claims this post relies on? It does not.
                – Did
                Feb 8 '18 at 17:56








              15




              15




              The second equal sign is a complete mystery. The passage from a sum to an integral also needs justification but it probably holds.
              – Did
              Mar 31 '14 at 16:25






              The second equal sign is a complete mystery. The passage from a sum to an integral also needs justification but it probably holds.
              – Did
              Mar 31 '14 at 16:25






              9




              9




              Would you care answering @Did 's question regarding the second equal sign? I am miffed as well. Thank you, Felix Marin.
              – Hans
              May 11 '15 at 17:35




              Would you care answering @Did 's question regarding the second equal sign? I am miffed as well. Thank you, Felix Marin.
              – Hans
              May 11 '15 at 17:35




              4




              4




              @Did's question has to be answered otherwise this seems to be an suitable answer
              – tired
              Oct 4 '15 at 12:12




              @Did's question has to be answered otherwise this seems to be an suitable answer
              – tired
              Oct 4 '15 at 12:12




              3




              3




              yeah for me too, can you please answer @Did 's question?
              – user153330
              Mar 1 '16 at 20:40






              yeah for me too, can you please answer @Did 's question?
              – user153330
              Mar 1 '16 at 20:40






              1




              1




              Is this supposed to justify the various unsubstantiated claims this post relies on? It does not.
              – Did
              Feb 8 '18 at 17:56




              Is this supposed to justify the various unsubstantiated claims this post relies on? It does not.
              – Did
              Feb 8 '18 at 17:56











              18














              I'll give you two hints:



              1) Poisson distributions;



              2) Central limit theorem



              I am not aware of any other technique to solve the problem, so any other answer is appreciated.






              share|cite|improve this answer



















              • 3




                In what country's education system is this a high school exercise?! I ask sincerely because I'm interested in that, and my experience is that even some of the most advanced mathematically education systems don't reach exercises as the one you're proposing...not even close. Of course, I don't know all the education systems (not even close, again), but the expression within the sum seems to be pretty tough...it reminds the series for the exponential function, but that n repeating in the numerator and upper limit...are you sure the expression is accurate?
                – DonAntonio
                Jun 19 '12 at 10:17






              • 2




                This problem is definitely not at high-school level. Without the hints I gave, I doubt most university students (even graduates) would solve it in reasonable time.
                – D. Thomine
                Jun 19 '12 at 10:43










              • The solution using Poisson distribution was also given here: Limit using Poisson distribution
                – Martin Sleziak
                Jun 19 '12 at 15:44










              • We actually made this exercice in our probability course.
                – Math_QED
                Nov 26 '18 at 10:09
















              18














              I'll give you two hints:



              1) Poisson distributions;



              2) Central limit theorem



              I am not aware of any other technique to solve the problem, so any other answer is appreciated.






              share|cite|improve this answer



















              • 3




                In what country's education system is this a high school exercise?! I ask sincerely because I'm interested in that, and my experience is that even some of the most advanced mathematically education systems don't reach exercises as the one you're proposing...not even close. Of course, I don't know all the education systems (not even close, again), but the expression within the sum seems to be pretty tough...it reminds the series for the exponential function, but that n repeating in the numerator and upper limit...are you sure the expression is accurate?
                – DonAntonio
                Jun 19 '12 at 10:17






              • 2




                This problem is definitely not at high-school level. Without the hints I gave, I doubt most university students (even graduates) would solve it in reasonable time.
                – D. Thomine
                Jun 19 '12 at 10:43










              • The solution using Poisson distribution was also given here: Limit using Poisson distribution
                – Martin Sleziak
                Jun 19 '12 at 15:44










              • We actually made this exercice in our probability course.
                – Math_QED
                Nov 26 '18 at 10:09














              18












              18








              18






              I'll give you two hints:



              1) Poisson distributions;



              2) Central limit theorem



              I am not aware of any other technique to solve the problem, so any other answer is appreciated.






              share|cite|improve this answer














              I'll give you two hints:



              1) Poisson distributions;



              2) Central limit theorem



              I am not aware of any other technique to solve the problem, so any other answer is appreciated.







              share|cite|improve this answer














              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer








              edited Jun 19 '12 at 10:53









              DonAntonio

              177k1491225




              177k1491225










              answered Jun 19 '12 at 9:50









              D. Thomine

              7,5441538




              7,5441538








              • 3




                In what country's education system is this a high school exercise?! I ask sincerely because I'm interested in that, and my experience is that even some of the most advanced mathematically education systems don't reach exercises as the one you're proposing...not even close. Of course, I don't know all the education systems (not even close, again), but the expression within the sum seems to be pretty tough...it reminds the series for the exponential function, but that n repeating in the numerator and upper limit...are you sure the expression is accurate?
                – DonAntonio
                Jun 19 '12 at 10:17






              • 2




                This problem is definitely not at high-school level. Without the hints I gave, I doubt most university students (even graduates) would solve it in reasonable time.
                – D. Thomine
                Jun 19 '12 at 10:43










              • The solution using Poisson distribution was also given here: Limit using Poisson distribution
                – Martin Sleziak
                Jun 19 '12 at 15:44










              • We actually made this exercice in our probability course.
                – Math_QED
                Nov 26 '18 at 10:09














              • 3




                In what country's education system is this a high school exercise?! I ask sincerely because I'm interested in that, and my experience is that even some of the most advanced mathematically education systems don't reach exercises as the one you're proposing...not even close. Of course, I don't know all the education systems (not even close, again), but the expression within the sum seems to be pretty tough...it reminds the series for the exponential function, but that n repeating in the numerator and upper limit...are you sure the expression is accurate?
                – DonAntonio
                Jun 19 '12 at 10:17






              • 2




                This problem is definitely not at high-school level. Without the hints I gave, I doubt most university students (even graduates) would solve it in reasonable time.
                – D. Thomine
                Jun 19 '12 at 10:43










              • The solution using Poisson distribution was also given here: Limit using Poisson distribution
                – Martin Sleziak
                Jun 19 '12 at 15:44










              • We actually made this exercice in our probability course.
                – Math_QED
                Nov 26 '18 at 10:09








              3




              3




              In what country's education system is this a high school exercise?! I ask sincerely because I'm interested in that, and my experience is that even some of the most advanced mathematically education systems don't reach exercises as the one you're proposing...not even close. Of course, I don't know all the education systems (not even close, again), but the expression within the sum seems to be pretty tough...it reminds the series for the exponential function, but that n repeating in the numerator and upper limit...are you sure the expression is accurate?
              – DonAntonio
              Jun 19 '12 at 10:17




              In what country's education system is this a high school exercise?! I ask sincerely because I'm interested in that, and my experience is that even some of the most advanced mathematically education systems don't reach exercises as the one you're proposing...not even close. Of course, I don't know all the education systems (not even close, again), but the expression within the sum seems to be pretty tough...it reminds the series for the exponential function, but that n repeating in the numerator and upper limit...are you sure the expression is accurate?
              – DonAntonio
              Jun 19 '12 at 10:17




              2




              2




              This problem is definitely not at high-school level. Without the hints I gave, I doubt most university students (even graduates) would solve it in reasonable time.
              – D. Thomine
              Jun 19 '12 at 10:43




              This problem is definitely not at high-school level. Without the hints I gave, I doubt most university students (even graduates) would solve it in reasonable time.
              – D. Thomine
              Jun 19 '12 at 10:43












              The solution using Poisson distribution was also given here: Limit using Poisson distribution
              – Martin Sleziak
              Jun 19 '12 at 15:44




              The solution using Poisson distribution was also given here: Limit using Poisson distribution
              – Martin Sleziak
              Jun 19 '12 at 15:44












              We actually made this exercice in our probability course.
              – Math_QED
              Nov 26 '18 at 10:09




              We actually made this exercice in our probability course.
              – Math_QED
              Nov 26 '18 at 10:09











              12














              I do not know how much this will help you.



              For a given $n$, the result is $dfrac{Gamma(n+1,n)}{n Gamma(n)}$ which has a limit equal to $dfrac12$ as $ntoinfty$.






              share|cite|improve this answer




























                12














                I do not know how much this will help you.



                For a given $n$, the result is $dfrac{Gamma(n+1,n)}{n Gamma(n)}$ which has a limit equal to $dfrac12$ as $ntoinfty$.






                share|cite|improve this answer


























                  12












                  12








                  12






                  I do not know how much this will help you.



                  For a given $n$, the result is $dfrac{Gamma(n+1,n)}{n Gamma(n)}$ which has a limit equal to $dfrac12$ as $ntoinfty$.






                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  I do not know how much this will help you.



                  For a given $n$, the result is $dfrac{Gamma(n+1,n)}{n Gamma(n)}$ which has a limit equal to $dfrac12$ as $ntoinfty$.







                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer








                  edited May 18 '14 at 10:54









                  Tunk-Fey

                  23k969100




                  23k969100










                  answered Sep 14 '13 at 14:33









                  Claude Leibovici

                  119k1157132




                  119k1157132























                      1














                      On this page there is a nice collection of evidence.



                      I add another proof which also uses the Stirling formula.



                      $displaystyle e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!} = e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=0}^nfrac{k^k (n-k)^{n-k}}{k!(n-k)!} hspace{4cm}$ e.g. here



                      $displaystyle = limlimits_{ntoinfty} e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=1}^{n-1}frac{e^k e^{n-k}}{sqrt{2pi k (1+mathcal{O}(1/k))}sqrt{2pi (n-k)(1+mathcal{O}(1/(n-k)))}} $



                      $displaystyle = limlimits_{ntoinfty} frac{1}{2pi}frac{1}{n}sumlimits_{k=1}^{n-1}frac{1}{sqrt{frac{k}{n}left(1-frac{k}{n}right)}} =frac{1}{2pi} intlimits_0^1frac{dx}{sqrt{x(1-x)}}=frac{Gamma(frac{1}{2})^2}{2pi~Gamma(1)} = frac{1}{2}$






                      share|cite|improve this answer























                      • (+1) Interesting idea.
                        – user 1357113
                        Nov 26 '18 at 22:23












                      • @user1357113 : That's kind of you, thanks. :)
                        – user90369
                        Nov 27 '18 at 8:09
















                      1














                      On this page there is a nice collection of evidence.



                      I add another proof which also uses the Stirling formula.



                      $displaystyle e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!} = e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=0}^nfrac{k^k (n-k)^{n-k}}{k!(n-k)!} hspace{4cm}$ e.g. here



                      $displaystyle = limlimits_{ntoinfty} e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=1}^{n-1}frac{e^k e^{n-k}}{sqrt{2pi k (1+mathcal{O}(1/k))}sqrt{2pi (n-k)(1+mathcal{O}(1/(n-k)))}} $



                      $displaystyle = limlimits_{ntoinfty} frac{1}{2pi}frac{1}{n}sumlimits_{k=1}^{n-1}frac{1}{sqrt{frac{k}{n}left(1-frac{k}{n}right)}} =frac{1}{2pi} intlimits_0^1frac{dx}{sqrt{x(1-x)}}=frac{Gamma(frac{1}{2})^2}{2pi~Gamma(1)} = frac{1}{2}$






                      share|cite|improve this answer























                      • (+1) Interesting idea.
                        – user 1357113
                        Nov 26 '18 at 22:23












                      • @user1357113 : That's kind of you, thanks. :)
                        – user90369
                        Nov 27 '18 at 8:09














                      1












                      1








                      1






                      On this page there is a nice collection of evidence.



                      I add another proof which also uses the Stirling formula.



                      $displaystyle e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!} = e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=0}^nfrac{k^k (n-k)^{n-k}}{k!(n-k)!} hspace{4cm}$ e.g. here



                      $displaystyle = limlimits_{ntoinfty} e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=1}^{n-1}frac{e^k e^{n-k}}{sqrt{2pi k (1+mathcal{O}(1/k))}sqrt{2pi (n-k)(1+mathcal{O}(1/(n-k)))}} $



                      $displaystyle = limlimits_{ntoinfty} frac{1}{2pi}frac{1}{n}sumlimits_{k=1}^{n-1}frac{1}{sqrt{frac{k}{n}left(1-frac{k}{n}right)}} =frac{1}{2pi} intlimits_0^1frac{dx}{sqrt{x(1-x)}}=frac{Gamma(frac{1}{2})^2}{2pi~Gamma(1)} = frac{1}{2}$






                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      On this page there is a nice collection of evidence.



                      I add another proof which also uses the Stirling formula.



                      $displaystyle e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=0}^nfrac{n^k}{k!} = e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=0}^nfrac{k^k (n-k)^{n-k}}{k!(n-k)!} hspace{4cm}$ e.g. here



                      $displaystyle = limlimits_{ntoinfty} e^{-n}sumlimits_{k=1}^{n-1}frac{e^k e^{n-k}}{sqrt{2pi k (1+mathcal{O}(1/k))}sqrt{2pi (n-k)(1+mathcal{O}(1/(n-k)))}} $



                      $displaystyle = limlimits_{ntoinfty} frac{1}{2pi}frac{1}{n}sumlimits_{k=1}^{n-1}frac{1}{sqrt{frac{k}{n}left(1-frac{k}{n}right)}} =frac{1}{2pi} intlimits_0^1frac{dx}{sqrt{x(1-x)}}=frac{Gamma(frac{1}{2})^2}{2pi~Gamma(1)} = frac{1}{2}$







                      share|cite|improve this answer














                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer








                      edited Nov 26 '18 at 10:30

























                      answered Nov 26 '18 at 9:54









                      user90369

                      8,183925




                      8,183925












                      • (+1) Interesting idea.
                        – user 1357113
                        Nov 26 '18 at 22:23












                      • @user1357113 : That's kind of you, thanks. :)
                        – user90369
                        Nov 27 '18 at 8:09


















                      • (+1) Interesting idea.
                        – user 1357113
                        Nov 26 '18 at 22:23












                      • @user1357113 : That's kind of you, thanks. :)
                        – user90369
                        Nov 27 '18 at 8:09
















                      (+1) Interesting idea.
                      – user 1357113
                      Nov 26 '18 at 22:23






                      (+1) Interesting idea.
                      – user 1357113
                      Nov 26 '18 at 22:23














                      @user1357113 : That's kind of you, thanks. :)
                      – user90369
                      Nov 27 '18 at 8:09




                      @user1357113 : That's kind of you, thanks. :)
                      – user90369
                      Nov 27 '18 at 8:09


















                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                      Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                      Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f160248%2fevaluating-lim-limits-n-to-infty-e-n-sum-limits-k-0n-fracnkk%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

                      Questions related to Moebius Transform of Characteristic Function of the Primes

                      List of scandals in India

                      Can not write log (Is /dev/pts mounted?) - openpty in Ubuntu-on-Windows?