For $n,k in {mathbb{Z}}^{+}$ (excluding $n=1$), does $frac{(n+k)!}{n!}$ ever equal $n!$
While investigating an integer sequence, I came across the following two OEIS entries:
A094331: Least k such that n! < (n+1)(n+2)(n+3)...(n+k).
A075357: a(n) = smallest k such that (n+1)(n+2)...(n+k) is just >= n!.
The generating rule for both of these sequences is basically identical, except A094331 uses $lt$ and A075357 uses $le$. This made me curious whether both sequences are actually identical (and I'm not the first; David Wasserman commented the same thing when he was adding more terms to A075357.) For the purposes of the OEIS, the sequences are technically different, because A094331(1) = 1 and A075357(1) = 0 (i.e. for $n=1$ and $k=0$, $frac{(n+k)!}{n!} = n!$.)
In approaching this problem, I first tried computational brute forcing. For values of $n$ from 2 to 1000000, $n ne k$. However, this approach is obviously limited. Since my ability in number theory is very weak, I was wondering if anyone with a greater knowledge of number theory may be able provide a definitive answer to this question.
number-theory oeis
add a comment |
While investigating an integer sequence, I came across the following two OEIS entries:
A094331: Least k such that n! < (n+1)(n+2)(n+3)...(n+k).
A075357: a(n) = smallest k such that (n+1)(n+2)...(n+k) is just >= n!.
The generating rule for both of these sequences is basically identical, except A094331 uses $lt$ and A075357 uses $le$. This made me curious whether both sequences are actually identical (and I'm not the first; David Wasserman commented the same thing when he was adding more terms to A075357.) For the purposes of the OEIS, the sequences are technically different, because A094331(1) = 1 and A075357(1) = 0 (i.e. for $n=1$ and $k=0$, $frac{(n+k)!}{n!} = n!$.)
In approaching this problem, I first tried computational brute forcing. For values of $n$ from 2 to 1000000, $n ne k$. However, this approach is obviously limited. Since my ability in number theory is very weak, I was wondering if anyone with a greater knowledge of number theory may be able provide a definitive answer to this question.
number-theory oeis
i'm confused. For $jne m$ then $frac {(n+j)!}{n!} ne frac {(n+m)!}{n1}$ so obviously that can't be true for all $k$ and furthermore $frac {(n+k)!}{n!} = n!implies (n+k)! = (n!)^2$ which can't ever be true for $n+k> 1$ as $m!$ is never a perfect square.
– fleablood
Nov 22 '18 at 1:52
You mean $k = 0$ in your example, right?
– anomaly
Nov 22 '18 at 1:53
Did you mean to ask does $frac{(n+k)!}{n!} = n!$ EVER true. As it stands it seems as though you are asking is it always true which of course it isn't.
– fleablood
Nov 22 '18 at 2:03
@anomaly Yes, I've made an edit.
– Graham
Nov 22 '18 at 3:11
@fleablood I've also made an edit regarding your comment.
– Graham
Nov 22 '18 at 3:16
add a comment |
While investigating an integer sequence, I came across the following two OEIS entries:
A094331: Least k such that n! < (n+1)(n+2)(n+3)...(n+k).
A075357: a(n) = smallest k such that (n+1)(n+2)...(n+k) is just >= n!.
The generating rule for both of these sequences is basically identical, except A094331 uses $lt$ and A075357 uses $le$. This made me curious whether both sequences are actually identical (and I'm not the first; David Wasserman commented the same thing when he was adding more terms to A075357.) For the purposes of the OEIS, the sequences are technically different, because A094331(1) = 1 and A075357(1) = 0 (i.e. for $n=1$ and $k=0$, $frac{(n+k)!}{n!} = n!$.)
In approaching this problem, I first tried computational brute forcing. For values of $n$ from 2 to 1000000, $n ne k$. However, this approach is obviously limited. Since my ability in number theory is very weak, I was wondering if anyone with a greater knowledge of number theory may be able provide a definitive answer to this question.
number-theory oeis
While investigating an integer sequence, I came across the following two OEIS entries:
A094331: Least k such that n! < (n+1)(n+2)(n+3)...(n+k).
A075357: a(n) = smallest k such that (n+1)(n+2)...(n+k) is just >= n!.
The generating rule for both of these sequences is basically identical, except A094331 uses $lt$ and A075357 uses $le$. This made me curious whether both sequences are actually identical (and I'm not the first; David Wasserman commented the same thing when he was adding more terms to A075357.) For the purposes of the OEIS, the sequences are technically different, because A094331(1) = 1 and A075357(1) = 0 (i.e. for $n=1$ and $k=0$, $frac{(n+k)!}{n!} = n!$.)
In approaching this problem, I first tried computational brute forcing. For values of $n$ from 2 to 1000000, $n ne k$. However, this approach is obviously limited. Since my ability in number theory is very weak, I was wondering if anyone with a greater knowledge of number theory may be able provide a definitive answer to this question.
number-theory oeis
number-theory oeis
edited Nov 22 '18 at 3:11
asked Nov 22 '18 at 1:25
Graham
1157
1157
i'm confused. For $jne m$ then $frac {(n+j)!}{n!} ne frac {(n+m)!}{n1}$ so obviously that can't be true for all $k$ and furthermore $frac {(n+k)!}{n!} = n!implies (n+k)! = (n!)^2$ which can't ever be true for $n+k> 1$ as $m!$ is never a perfect square.
– fleablood
Nov 22 '18 at 1:52
You mean $k = 0$ in your example, right?
– anomaly
Nov 22 '18 at 1:53
Did you mean to ask does $frac{(n+k)!}{n!} = n!$ EVER true. As it stands it seems as though you are asking is it always true which of course it isn't.
– fleablood
Nov 22 '18 at 2:03
@anomaly Yes, I've made an edit.
– Graham
Nov 22 '18 at 3:11
@fleablood I've also made an edit regarding your comment.
– Graham
Nov 22 '18 at 3:16
add a comment |
i'm confused. For $jne m$ then $frac {(n+j)!}{n!} ne frac {(n+m)!}{n1}$ so obviously that can't be true for all $k$ and furthermore $frac {(n+k)!}{n!} = n!implies (n+k)! = (n!)^2$ which can't ever be true for $n+k> 1$ as $m!$ is never a perfect square.
– fleablood
Nov 22 '18 at 1:52
You mean $k = 0$ in your example, right?
– anomaly
Nov 22 '18 at 1:53
Did you mean to ask does $frac{(n+k)!}{n!} = n!$ EVER true. As it stands it seems as though you are asking is it always true which of course it isn't.
– fleablood
Nov 22 '18 at 2:03
@anomaly Yes, I've made an edit.
– Graham
Nov 22 '18 at 3:11
@fleablood I've also made an edit regarding your comment.
– Graham
Nov 22 '18 at 3:16
i'm confused. For $jne m$ then $frac {(n+j)!}{n!} ne frac {(n+m)!}{n1}$ so obviously that can't be true for all $k$ and furthermore $frac {(n+k)!}{n!} = n!implies (n+k)! = (n!)^2$ which can't ever be true for $n+k> 1$ as $m!$ is never a perfect square.
– fleablood
Nov 22 '18 at 1:52
i'm confused. For $jne m$ then $frac {(n+j)!}{n!} ne frac {(n+m)!}{n1}$ so obviously that can't be true for all $k$ and furthermore $frac {(n+k)!}{n!} = n!implies (n+k)! = (n!)^2$ which can't ever be true for $n+k> 1$ as $m!$ is never a perfect square.
– fleablood
Nov 22 '18 at 1:52
You mean $k = 0$ in your example, right?
– anomaly
Nov 22 '18 at 1:53
You mean $k = 0$ in your example, right?
– anomaly
Nov 22 '18 at 1:53
Did you mean to ask does $frac{(n+k)!}{n!} = n!$ EVER true. As it stands it seems as though you are asking is it always true which of course it isn't.
– fleablood
Nov 22 '18 at 2:03
Did you mean to ask does $frac{(n+k)!}{n!} = n!$ EVER true. As it stands it seems as though you are asking is it always true which of course it isn't.
– fleablood
Nov 22 '18 at 2:03
@anomaly Yes, I've made an edit.
– Graham
Nov 22 '18 at 3:11
@anomaly Yes, I've made an edit.
– Graham
Nov 22 '18 at 3:11
@fleablood I've also made an edit regarding your comment.
– Graham
Nov 22 '18 at 3:16
@fleablood I've also made an edit regarding your comment.
– Graham
Nov 22 '18 at 3:16
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
By a theorem of Chebyshev, there exists for any integer $n > 1$ a prime $p$ with $n < p < 2n$. Hence $(2n)!$ and $(2n+1)$! are not perfect squares, since they're divisible by $p$ but not $p^2$. It follows that $(n+k)!/n! not = n!$ for any integers $n, k > 0$.
add a comment |
With the exception of $N=1$, $N!$ is never a square. This is because, by Bertrand's Postulate, there is always a prime between $N$ and $lfloor N/2rfloor$ (to be precise, a prime $p$ satisfying $lfloor N/2rfloorlt ple N$), and such a prime can only divide $N!$ once. So if we take $N=n+k$ with positive integers $n$ and $k$, we have $Ngt1$ and so $N!=(n+k)!$ is not a square. In particular, it cannot be the case that $(n+k)!=(n!)^2$. Thus it is never the case that $(n+k)!/n!=n!$.
It might be of interest to see if there is a proof that $N!$ is never the square of a factorial that doesn't rely on Bertrand's Postulate.
add a comment |
The only cases where those two sequences would differ would be when $n! = frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ or $(n+k)! = (n!)^2$ and that is the only time you can have $n! le frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ and $n! < frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ not both be true or not both be false.
anomaly's answer explains why that can never for $n > 1$.
I just want to add that if $n = 1$ then this is $(k+1)! = 1$ which is true only if $k =0$.
Hence the sequences do differ at $n=1$. The first term of A075357 is $0$ while the term of A094331 is $1$. Otherwise the sequences are identical. But they do differ and $n=1$
So for A075357 you want the least $k$ so that $1! < frac {(1+k)!}{1!}$ and that is $1! = frac {1!}{1!}$ and $1! < frac {2!}{1!}$ and that is when $1+ k = 2$ or $k =1$. But of A094331 you want the least $k$ so that $1! le frac {(1+k)!}{1!}$ and because $1! = frac {1!}{1!}$ that is $1+k =1$ or $k = 0$.
As for any other $n > 1$ we have $frac {(n+k)!}{n!}ne n!$ we have $n! le frac {(n+k)!}{n!} iff n! < frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ and the sequences are equal.
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3008628%2ffor-n-k-in-mathbbz-excluding-n-1-does-fracnkn-ever%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
By a theorem of Chebyshev, there exists for any integer $n > 1$ a prime $p$ with $n < p < 2n$. Hence $(2n)!$ and $(2n+1)$! are not perfect squares, since they're divisible by $p$ but not $p^2$. It follows that $(n+k)!/n! not = n!$ for any integers $n, k > 0$.
add a comment |
By a theorem of Chebyshev, there exists for any integer $n > 1$ a prime $p$ with $n < p < 2n$. Hence $(2n)!$ and $(2n+1)$! are not perfect squares, since they're divisible by $p$ but not $p^2$. It follows that $(n+k)!/n! not = n!$ for any integers $n, k > 0$.
add a comment |
By a theorem of Chebyshev, there exists for any integer $n > 1$ a prime $p$ with $n < p < 2n$. Hence $(2n)!$ and $(2n+1)$! are not perfect squares, since they're divisible by $p$ but not $p^2$. It follows that $(n+k)!/n! not = n!$ for any integers $n, k > 0$.
By a theorem of Chebyshev, there exists for any integer $n > 1$ a prime $p$ with $n < p < 2n$. Hence $(2n)!$ and $(2n+1)$! are not perfect squares, since they're divisible by $p$ but not $p^2$. It follows that $(n+k)!/n! not = n!$ for any integers $n, k > 0$.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 1:48
anomaly
17.4k42664
17.4k42664
add a comment |
add a comment |
With the exception of $N=1$, $N!$ is never a square. This is because, by Bertrand's Postulate, there is always a prime between $N$ and $lfloor N/2rfloor$ (to be precise, a prime $p$ satisfying $lfloor N/2rfloorlt ple N$), and such a prime can only divide $N!$ once. So if we take $N=n+k$ with positive integers $n$ and $k$, we have $Ngt1$ and so $N!=(n+k)!$ is not a square. In particular, it cannot be the case that $(n+k)!=(n!)^2$. Thus it is never the case that $(n+k)!/n!=n!$.
It might be of interest to see if there is a proof that $N!$ is never the square of a factorial that doesn't rely on Bertrand's Postulate.
add a comment |
With the exception of $N=1$, $N!$ is never a square. This is because, by Bertrand's Postulate, there is always a prime between $N$ and $lfloor N/2rfloor$ (to be precise, a prime $p$ satisfying $lfloor N/2rfloorlt ple N$), and such a prime can only divide $N!$ once. So if we take $N=n+k$ with positive integers $n$ and $k$, we have $Ngt1$ and so $N!=(n+k)!$ is not a square. In particular, it cannot be the case that $(n+k)!=(n!)^2$. Thus it is never the case that $(n+k)!/n!=n!$.
It might be of interest to see if there is a proof that $N!$ is never the square of a factorial that doesn't rely on Bertrand's Postulate.
add a comment |
With the exception of $N=1$, $N!$ is never a square. This is because, by Bertrand's Postulate, there is always a prime between $N$ and $lfloor N/2rfloor$ (to be precise, a prime $p$ satisfying $lfloor N/2rfloorlt ple N$), and such a prime can only divide $N!$ once. So if we take $N=n+k$ with positive integers $n$ and $k$, we have $Ngt1$ and so $N!=(n+k)!$ is not a square. In particular, it cannot be the case that $(n+k)!=(n!)^2$. Thus it is never the case that $(n+k)!/n!=n!$.
It might be of interest to see if there is a proof that $N!$ is never the square of a factorial that doesn't rely on Bertrand's Postulate.
With the exception of $N=1$, $N!$ is never a square. This is because, by Bertrand's Postulate, there is always a prime between $N$ and $lfloor N/2rfloor$ (to be precise, a prime $p$ satisfying $lfloor N/2rfloorlt ple N$), and such a prime can only divide $N!$ once. So if we take $N=n+k$ with positive integers $n$ and $k$, we have $Ngt1$ and so $N!=(n+k)!$ is not a square. In particular, it cannot be the case that $(n+k)!=(n!)^2$. Thus it is never the case that $(n+k)!/n!=n!$.
It might be of interest to see if there is a proof that $N!$ is never the square of a factorial that doesn't rely on Bertrand's Postulate.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 2:16
Barry Cipra
59.1k653124
59.1k653124
add a comment |
add a comment |
The only cases where those two sequences would differ would be when $n! = frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ or $(n+k)! = (n!)^2$ and that is the only time you can have $n! le frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ and $n! < frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ not both be true or not both be false.
anomaly's answer explains why that can never for $n > 1$.
I just want to add that if $n = 1$ then this is $(k+1)! = 1$ which is true only if $k =0$.
Hence the sequences do differ at $n=1$. The first term of A075357 is $0$ while the term of A094331 is $1$. Otherwise the sequences are identical. But they do differ and $n=1$
So for A075357 you want the least $k$ so that $1! < frac {(1+k)!}{1!}$ and that is $1! = frac {1!}{1!}$ and $1! < frac {2!}{1!}$ and that is when $1+ k = 2$ or $k =1$. But of A094331 you want the least $k$ so that $1! le frac {(1+k)!}{1!}$ and because $1! = frac {1!}{1!}$ that is $1+k =1$ or $k = 0$.
As for any other $n > 1$ we have $frac {(n+k)!}{n!}ne n!$ we have $n! le frac {(n+k)!}{n!} iff n! < frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ and the sequences are equal.
add a comment |
The only cases where those two sequences would differ would be when $n! = frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ or $(n+k)! = (n!)^2$ and that is the only time you can have $n! le frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ and $n! < frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ not both be true or not both be false.
anomaly's answer explains why that can never for $n > 1$.
I just want to add that if $n = 1$ then this is $(k+1)! = 1$ which is true only if $k =0$.
Hence the sequences do differ at $n=1$. The first term of A075357 is $0$ while the term of A094331 is $1$. Otherwise the sequences are identical. But they do differ and $n=1$
So for A075357 you want the least $k$ so that $1! < frac {(1+k)!}{1!}$ and that is $1! = frac {1!}{1!}$ and $1! < frac {2!}{1!}$ and that is when $1+ k = 2$ or $k =1$. But of A094331 you want the least $k$ so that $1! le frac {(1+k)!}{1!}$ and because $1! = frac {1!}{1!}$ that is $1+k =1$ or $k = 0$.
As for any other $n > 1$ we have $frac {(n+k)!}{n!}ne n!$ we have $n! le frac {(n+k)!}{n!} iff n! < frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ and the sequences are equal.
add a comment |
The only cases where those two sequences would differ would be when $n! = frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ or $(n+k)! = (n!)^2$ and that is the only time you can have $n! le frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ and $n! < frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ not both be true or not both be false.
anomaly's answer explains why that can never for $n > 1$.
I just want to add that if $n = 1$ then this is $(k+1)! = 1$ which is true only if $k =0$.
Hence the sequences do differ at $n=1$. The first term of A075357 is $0$ while the term of A094331 is $1$. Otherwise the sequences are identical. But they do differ and $n=1$
So for A075357 you want the least $k$ so that $1! < frac {(1+k)!}{1!}$ and that is $1! = frac {1!}{1!}$ and $1! < frac {2!}{1!}$ and that is when $1+ k = 2$ or $k =1$. But of A094331 you want the least $k$ so that $1! le frac {(1+k)!}{1!}$ and because $1! = frac {1!}{1!}$ that is $1+k =1$ or $k = 0$.
As for any other $n > 1$ we have $frac {(n+k)!}{n!}ne n!$ we have $n! le frac {(n+k)!}{n!} iff n! < frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ and the sequences are equal.
The only cases where those two sequences would differ would be when $n! = frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ or $(n+k)! = (n!)^2$ and that is the only time you can have $n! le frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ and $n! < frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ not both be true or not both be false.
anomaly's answer explains why that can never for $n > 1$.
I just want to add that if $n = 1$ then this is $(k+1)! = 1$ which is true only if $k =0$.
Hence the sequences do differ at $n=1$. The first term of A075357 is $0$ while the term of A094331 is $1$. Otherwise the sequences are identical. But they do differ and $n=1$
So for A075357 you want the least $k$ so that $1! < frac {(1+k)!}{1!}$ and that is $1! = frac {1!}{1!}$ and $1! < frac {2!}{1!}$ and that is when $1+ k = 2$ or $k =1$. But of A094331 you want the least $k$ so that $1! le frac {(1+k)!}{1!}$ and because $1! = frac {1!}{1!}$ that is $1+k =1$ or $k = 0$.
As for any other $n > 1$ we have $frac {(n+k)!}{n!}ne n!$ we have $n! le frac {(n+k)!}{n!} iff n! < frac {(n+k)!}{n!}$ and the sequences are equal.
edited Nov 22 '18 at 2:33
answered Nov 22 '18 at 2:10
fleablood
68.4k22685
68.4k22685
add a comment |
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3008628%2ffor-n-k-in-mathbbz-excluding-n-1-does-fracnkn-ever%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
i'm confused. For $jne m$ then $frac {(n+j)!}{n!} ne frac {(n+m)!}{n1}$ so obviously that can't be true for all $k$ and furthermore $frac {(n+k)!}{n!} = n!implies (n+k)! = (n!)^2$ which can't ever be true for $n+k> 1$ as $m!$ is never a perfect square.
– fleablood
Nov 22 '18 at 1:52
You mean $k = 0$ in your example, right?
– anomaly
Nov 22 '18 at 1:53
Did you mean to ask does $frac{(n+k)!}{n!} = n!$ EVER true. As it stands it seems as though you are asking is it always true which of course it isn't.
– fleablood
Nov 22 '18 at 2:03
@anomaly Yes, I've made an edit.
– Graham
Nov 22 '18 at 3:11
@fleablood I've also made an edit regarding your comment.
– Graham
Nov 22 '18 at 3:16