Excel can brute force up to here Actual answer by u/ubuwalker31 below: https://www.reddit.com/r/askmath/comments/1jagqzj/comment/mhq283z/ Answer from TrueYahve on reddit.com
🌐
Reddit
reddit.com › r/theydidthemath › [self] which is greater: 2^100! or (2^100)! (also how some mf on the internet and chatgpt kept trying to trick me)
r/theydidthemath on Reddit: [SELF] Which is greater: 2^100! or (2^100)! (Also how some mf on the internet and ChatGPT kept trying to trick me)
August 11, 2023 -

Hello, so just as an introduction, I am a novice level mathematician. I am a computer software engineer so I have been trying to learn group theory on my own but have been struggling. However, my path to self-learning this field made me realize there are times where I have to compromise my own knowledge as it is vastly overwhelmed by all the special methods, functions, and results that are in the toolbox of advanced mathematicians. This made me excited for ChatGPT but after this incidence I am realizing how detrimental beginners relying on ChatGPT will get.

I saw on Instagram a comparison question between two values: 2^100! and (2^100)! I wasn’t so sure at first but here is my opinion on it (not enough to be a proof):

We know for a fact that when we divide a=(2^100)!/2^100! we should get a less than 1 to show that the denominator is bigger and if a more than 1, the numerator is bigger.

I tried to show that we can express the numerator as (2^{100})^99! which shows 2^100 being multiplied by itself 99! times.

The denominator is (1)(2)(3)…(2^{100}-1)(2^100) which can be seen as values <= 2^100 being multiplied 2^{100}-1 (1 is identity) times.

Then I said for large numbers of n, (2^n)-1<(n-1)! which just shows 99! > 2^{100}-1

So because the denominator 2^100! has more terms and terms that are at least greater than or equal to the terms in (2^100)! and every single term left over will only increase the denominator, our a goes very close to 0, which is less than 1. So therefore, 2^100! is bigger.

This is a little bit of a messy demonstration but I think it is valid. However, someone told me there was a better way we could make this rigorous by applying log2. I responded back saying that one can apply log2 on both sides. I told them that this claim is quite bold as log2(2^100!) is trivial but log2((2^100)!) seems very difficult to simplify. I suggested maybe rewriting it as a sum then taking the integral then applying some boundaries but that seems really hard to do in this situation due to the shear magnitude of (2^100)!. Then, I received a comment that made me distrust ChatGPT forever. You see, I asked this question to ChatGPT previously and they gave me the following response:

“The factorial operation grows much faster than exponential operations as the input value increases. For 2^100, you’re looking at a very large number. However, when you take the factorial of that number, (2^100)!, you’re multiplying 2^100 by every integer less than it down to 1. This operation grows the number astronomically compared to the exponential growth of 2^100!, which is 2 raised to the power of the factorial of 100 (a much smaller number than 2^100 itself).

Therefore, without needing to calculate the exact values, we can deduce that (2^100)! is significantly larger than 2^100!.”

This response genuinely made me question my existence as this reasoning was so weird. This was done by ChatGPT4, probably the best LLM available to the public right now.

So, I already had suspicions that the reason why so many people in the comments were getting this question wrong was because of ChatGPT.

Back to the man who answered me. When questioning how he will evaluate log2((2^100)!), he has said:

“Not it's pretty straightforward. I wrote a comment for this method but i'll rewrite it here. You rewrite log2(2^100 !) as the sum of log2 (i), you majorate by the number of terms time the greatest term, that gives 100 × 2^100. In the end you have to compare 99! With 2^100, which is easy. Same as comparing 297with 99! / 8. End”

The reason why I blame this on ChatGPT is that if you actually tell it to apply log2, it tells you the image as I have posted.

I thought I was about to learn some kind of new method but no, this guy on Instagram just searched up how to do it on ChatGPT then tried to lecture me on what the retard AI suggested. Idk man. This type of misinformation is not at all trivial to a math layman and even for myself tbh. I had been questioning myself over this for so long since ChatGPT keeps giving responses like:

“The exponentiation rule a^mn = (a^m)^n applies here, but it’s essential to apply it correctly. Correctly, if you have 2^100!, it does not simplify or equal (2^100)^99! directly due to the nature of factorial growth and exponential operations.”

I think ChatGPT is starting to make the math area of the internet, once a place where only people with somewhat built-in prerequisite knowledge of foundational mathematical operations and techniques, to be full of people who use ChatGPT and just straight up give misinformation that is very hard to detect.

When I confronted the guy he said:

“I did it in my head in 2 min. It's an actual proof without "we observe" . if you couldn't understd what i said before it's just skill issue”

The man didn’t even bother to EXPLAIN the maths and his conclusion, he is just jamming operations together and seeing if ChatGPT will find a way to justify his methods. I think unless ChatGPT gets better at math, we are going to see a lot of math disinformation on the internet which really sucks.

Edit: (2n)-1<(n-1)! should be (2^n)-1<(n-1)!

🌐
Quora
quora.com › Which-is-larger-2-100-or-2-100
Which is larger? [math] 2^{100!}[/math] or [math]2^{100}! [/math] - Quora
Answer (1 of 25): I often suggest this as a problem to be solved by completely elementary means: no Stirling, no logs, no nothing. The key observation is that n!
People also ask

Where can the concept of factorial be used?
Ans: The concept of factorial in mathematics can be useful with respect to permutations and combinations. ...Read full
🌐
unacademy.com
unacademy.com › cbse class 12 › cbse class 12 study materials › mathematics › what is 100 factorial?
What is 100 Factorial? Factorial Definition, Table of Factorials, FAQs
What do we understand from the term factorial and what is the formula for the calculation of a factorial.
Ans: For a whole number ‘n’ the term factorial is explained as the product of the particular digit with ...Read full
🌐
unacademy.com
unacademy.com › cbse class 12 › cbse class 12 study materials › mathematics › what is 100 factorial?
What is 100 Factorial? Factorial Definition, Table of Factorials, FAQs
🌐
Reddit
reddit.com › r/askmath › which one is greater
r/askmath on Reddit: Which one is greater
March 13, 2025 -

2 raised to (100 factorial )or (2 raised to 100 ) factorial, i believe its one on the right because i heard somewhere when terms are larger factorial beats exponents but then again im not sure , is there a way to solve it

🌐
YouTube
youtube.com › shorts › 0gTKLk0MYUc
Which is larger? 2^(100!) vs. (2^100)! - YouTube
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
Published   March 15, 2025
🌐
CalculatorSoup
calculatorsoup.com › calculators › discretemathematics › factorials.php
Factorial Calculator n!
You will get the long integer answer and also the scientific notation for large factorials. You may want to copy the long integer answer result and paste it into another document to view it. n! = n × (n - 1) × (n - 2) × (n - 3) × ...
🌐
Unacademy
unacademy.com › cbse class 12 › cbse class 12 study materials › mathematics › what is 100 factorial?
What is 100 Factorial? Factorial Definition, Table of Factorials, FAQs
June 21, 2024 - Through the means of the formula and using it for the calculation of factorial 100, it can be inferred that the factorial for 100 would be equivalent to 9.332621544 E + 157.
Find elsewhere
🌐
Cuemath
cuemath.com › numbers › factorial
Factorial - Meaning, Formula | Factorial of Hundred & 0
So, 3 × 2 × 1 = 3! (3 factorial), ... The symbol used to represent factorial is ' ! '. For example "9 factorial" is written as 9!. The factorial of 100 is written as 100!...
🌐
YouTube
youtube.com › eddie woo
What power of 2 is a factor of "100!"? - YouTube
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
Published   March 4, 2015
Views   11K
🌐
Reddit
reddit.com › r/askmath › factorial of 100 breaks my calculator
r/askmath on Reddit: factorial of 100 breaks my calculator
July 22, 2022 -

Hey guys,

I have a problem to solve this on my own. Is there a trick I don't know for solving 100! ?

Top answer
1 of 4
20
Hello! The thing about factorials is that they are VERY BIG. 100! has 158 digits, and most calculators won't go higher than 100, which happens at 70! When handling combinations, you should become familiar with how to reduce factorials. For example, in your screenshot you have (100 3), which can also be written as 100 C 3, and the formula for those is: 100! / ((100-3)!*3!) = 100! / (97!* 3!) Think about how 100! breaks down: 100 * 99 * 98 * 97 * 96 * ... * 2 * 1. If you group together all of the terms after 97, you can change this to 100! = 100 * 99 * 98 * 97! Since you have 97! in the numerator and denominator, you can cancel those and rewrite the fraction: 100!/(97!*3!) = 100*99*98/3!, which can be plugged into a calculator to get 161700.
2 of 4
3
Another way is to express factorials in terms of some other base n! = 1 * 2 * 3 * 4 * ... * n n! = (e^ln(1)) * (e^ln(2)) * (e^ln(3)) * ... * (e^ln(n)) n! = e^(ln(1) + ln(2) + ln(3) + ... + ln(n)) n! = e^sigma(ln(t) , t = 1 , t = n) Surely your calculator can handle ln(1) + ln(2) + ... + ln(100) nCk => n! / (k! * (n - k)!) => e^sigma(ln(t) , t = 1 , t = n) / (e^sigma(ln(t) , t = 1 , t = k) * e^sigma(ln(t) , t = 1 , t = (n - k)) Looks like hell, I know, but your calculator can handle it. e^(sigma(ln(t) , t = 1 , t = n) - sigma(ln(t) , t = 1 , t = k) - sigma(ln(t) , t = 1 , t = n - k)) You don't need it to evaluate 100C97, but 100C50 gets pretty tedious to enter on a calculator. You can use Stirling's Approximation, too. n! is approximately sqrt(2 * pi * n) * (n/e)^n. 100! = 9.3326215443944152681699238856267 * 10^157 sqrt(2 * pi * 100) * (100/e)^100 = 9.3248476252693432477647561271787 * 10^157 9.3326 * 10^157 compared to 9.3248 * 10^157. Not a bad approximation. nCk => sqrt(2 * pi * n) * (n/e)^n / (sqrt(2 * pi * k) * (k/e)^k * sqrt(2 * pi * (n - k)) * ((n - k) / e)^(n - k)) => sqrt(2 * pi * n / (4 * pi^2 * k * (n - k))) * (n/e)^n * (e/k)^k * (e/(n - k))^(n - k) => sqrt(n / (2 * pi * k * (n - k))) * n^n * e^k * e^(n - k) / (e^n * k^k * (n - k)^(n - k)) => sqrt(n / (2pi * k * (n - k))) * n^n * e^(k + n - k - n) * k^(-k) * (n - k)^(k - n) => sqrt(n / (2pi * k * (n - k))) * n^n * 1 * k^(-k) * (n - k)^(k - n) => sqrt(n / (2pi * k * (n - k))) * n^n * k^(-k) * (n - k)^(k - n) 100C50 = 100,891,344,545,564,193,334,812,497,256 Approximation sqrt(100 / (2 * pi * 50 * 50)) * 100^100 * 50^(-50) * 50^(-50) sqrt(50 / (pi * 2500)) * 100^100 * 50^(-100) sqrt(1 / (50 * pi)) * (100/50)^100 sqrt(1 / (50 * pi)) * 2^100 101,143,884,241,458,946,587,585,663,181.38... Off by about 0.3%, which is good enough, if you think about it. And that's just at a small number like 100. It just gets better as n gets bigger.
🌐
GeeksforGeeks
geeksforgeeks.org › dsa › factorial-large-number
Find the Factorial of a large number - GeeksforGeeks
July 23, 2025 - Big Integer can also be used to calculate the factorial of large numbers. ... At i = 2: ans = ans x i = 1 x 2 = 2 At i = 3: ans = ans x i = 2 x 3 = 6 At i = 4: ans = ans x i = 6 x 4 = 24 At i = 5: ans = ans x i = 24 x 5 = 120
🌐
Brainly
brainly.in › math › secondary school
how many 2s, 3s and 5s are there in 100 factorial...wrong answers to be reported and right ones will be - Brainly.in
July 5, 2020 - Say we have 50! and we need to ... we also take the approximate values when dividing, Similarly for 100! ... Hence, there are 97 2s......
🌐
Quora
quora.com › How-do-you-compute-the-value-of-2-100-by-hand
How to compute the value of 2^100 by hand - Quora
Answer (1 of 8): (1) 2^10 = 1024 (2) 2^20 = = (1k+24)^2= = 1m +48k +576 (3) 2^30 = (1k+24)(1m+48k+576) = 1km +48m+576k+ +24m+1152k+24(600–24) = 1km+73m+(576+152)k+14k400 —576 = 1km+73m+741k+824 ~~~~~~~~~2^40~~~~~~~~~~~~ (4) 2^40 = ...
🌐
Mycoted
mycoted.com › 100_Factorial
100 Factorial - Mycoted
How many zeros are there at the end of 100! (factorial)?
Top answer
1 of 4
7
Using well known approximations for the length and number of trailing zeroes of n!, and making the reasonable assumption that the inside zeros appear with frequency $\frac{1}{10}$, we get the following approximation of the total number of zeros, t, in n!: · $t = \lfloor \frac{1}{10}(\frac{\log (2 \Pi n)}{2}+n\log (\frac{n}{e})- \frac{n}{4}+ \log(n)) + \frac{n}{4} - log(n)\rfloor $ · Which simplifies to: · $t = \lfloor \frac{n (9 \ln (10)-4)+4 (n-9) \ln (n)+2 \ln(2 \Pi n)}{40 \ln(10)} \rfloor$ · This approximation seems to work well for n up to at least 10,000. · 100!, with digit length 158, has less inside zeroes, 6, with 24 trailing, than the normal expectation for a total of 30, with t=36. · 98! is "zero-perfect", i.e. inside zeroes appear with exactly frequency $1/10$, with actual total zero count 35 and $t = 35$ · Other examples of zero-perfect factorials are: 1009!, 1097!, 1112!, 2993!, 6128!, .... · There appears to be a strong correlation of n having only 0-3 prime factors in {2, 3, 5} if n! is zero-perfect. Uneven n is often a prime number if n! is zero-perfect.
2 of 4
3
It is unlikely. There are ways to compute the nth digit of certain numbers in certain bases (for example, pi in base 16) without having to compute the entire number, but in most situations, the number or formula for it either has very special properties (e.g. 101*10^n) in order to answer the question, or the work done to answer the question is tantamount to calculating the number, writing it down, and counting the digits. Not only do I know of no way to answer the question otherwise, I will wager a small amount of money that no such nice way will posted here for the next 2 years. · Gerhard "Willing To Formalize The Bet" Paseman, 2012.07.12