Perhaps the interviewer was looking for an argument that no such solution can exist? The counterargument would look like this: divide the N numbers into two halves, each N/2 numbers. Now, suppose you don't have enough memory to represent the first N/2 numbers (ignoring changes in ordering); in that case, two different bags of numbers will have the same representation in memory. One can now construct a second half of numbers for which the algorithm will get the wrong answer for at least one of the two colliding cases.

This is assuming a deterministic algorithm; maybe a random algorithm could work with high probability and less memory?