Personal writing/math conventions when doing physics/math calculations?

In summary: M...for different operations like multiplication and division (since these are all done with two hands). For instance, 3M would be written as "three multiplied by M".
  • #1
MissSilvy
300
1
I believe this post is allowed here, but if it belongs elsewhere I apologize.

I am now almost at the end of my undergraduate degree and looking back over my old work and old calculations from semesters prior made me realize that I have absolutely no consistent conventions when doing physics calculations. Usually this is fine but sometimes it impedes progress on the work and almost always it makes the work very hard to follow later, even if the rough work is rewritten to a final form.

Half the calculations would be scribbled on another page entirely and in random places (top left then lower right then margin) and even those that are all on the same page and in order are a little hard to follow. New equations look exactly the same as the parts of the calculation I am working on, mathematical definitions and calculations are written randomly, and rearranged equations look to be just as unique as the original equations above them because I have no consistent symbol or formatting to denote it was just a different form of the above.

[Someone recently pointed me to a page that gives tips for mathematical handwriting to make distinguishing letters and Greek symbols easier, which helped enormously. I am looking for similar tips for equations.]

My question is what are some of the conventions that the rest of PF uses when doing pen-and-paper calculations? Specifically:
  • Do you just start at the top of the page and start a new line for every operation?
  • Is there any way you denote when an equation need to be broken up into two lines because it cannot fit in the width of the paper?
  • Are certain steps of a calculation 'indented' to denote a relationship between the header equation and the ones inside it? Which ones?
  • How are equations that are not derived denoted to distinguish them from the ones you are calculating (such as when calculating the speed of sound and the ideal gas law is called in the context of the calculation) ?
  • Do you distinguish between new step in a calculation and a merely rearranged form of a previous step?
  • How do you denote when two equations are combined ( for example, one substituted into the other to yield a third equation)?
This may be a little neurotic to lay out conventions for everything but my current method is nonexistent and I am genuinely curious how physicists with more experience keep track of what I assume are increasingly complex calculations. I've asked some of my fellow students and professors and gotten some very broad tips but everyone was very interested in learning what I had heard so far, so I am hoping this would prove of some use to people other than myself.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I believe I basically migrated my "style" to that of the best of my lecturers. He was never afraid to insert explanatory sentences or phrases between lines of mathematics to lead the reader's comprehension smoothly from one line of maths to the next. The result was that his handiwork could be read aloud like a well-constructed English essay.

Professional journals (peer reviewed) are often good examples of style, and illustrate the usefulness of labelling each equation that will later be referenced.
 
  • #3
I don't think you are being neurotic at all.

Good conventions / notation is a large part of success.
 
  • #4
I order the question-solving process using Roman numerals.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
When doing substitutions I have learned to do *only* the substitution.
I write the equation replacing symbols literally without doing anything else.
The reason is that this is where mistakes typically come in.
And if mistakes do come in, it's handy to still be able to understand what I did, and to check the steps separately.

When deriving a sub expression, it becomes a challenge to keep that derivation separate from the main derivation.
To do so, I usually put a large circle around a sub derivation, with an arrow like a text balloon where it is used.
Or alternatively I indent it, or box it.

When I'm finished with something I often put a white square behind it (the qed symbol), to mark where that is.
 
  • #6
Another key tool to me is the judicious use of several types of brackets and parenthesis.
 
  • #7
If I have a lot of intermediate results that I need later on, I usually box them.
 
  • #8
Cool thread! I liked the link too. Many of those tips I have adopted for the very reasons they say. My graduate quantum professor had the neatest and most meticulous handwriting of all my professors and I copied some from him. One is to distinguish between i as an index and i as an imaginary number by writing the index in script and the number in print. I do the same for j and k. He was fond of using the same letter for two things distinguished in this way...

I recall in early undergrad I got a remark on an assignment about mixing up capital and lower case for the variable. What a noob thing to do! Then in graduate school I learned to distinguish between script and print. lol

I also had a lot of British professors, particularly in undergrad. They liked to underline their vectors. I adopted the habit from them and like it. But I know its not convention so when I interact with others I try to remember to draw arrows rather than underlines.

I've always been fairly neat and correct even with scratch work. Maybe sloppy legibility, but ordered on the page.
 
  • #9
My rule is "paper is cheap". If after a page things are a mess, rewrite it on a clean sheet. For long problems (think Jackson) this is a life saver.
 
  • #10
I try and write as if I were doing a derivation in a textbook chapter or paper. Mixed equations with interspersed explanatory text. Important equations get numbers, and results are boxed.

Depending on available time I will solve homeworks/assignments on paper, write it up in [itex]\LaTeX[/itex], and turn that in.

I try to use a consistent notation, e.g. vectors have underbars, [itex]\underline{x}[/itex], unit vectors are underbars with hats, [itex]\underline{\hat{x}}[/itex].
 
  • #11
Vanadium 50 said:
My rule is "paper is cheap". If after a page things are a mess, rewrite it on a clean sheet. For long problems (think Jackson) this is a life saver.

+1

I wish I could bring myself to practice that more. Somehow I always am miserly about using paper.
 
  • #12
Vanadium 50 said:
For long problems (think Jackson) this is a life saver.

What's Jackson? :confused:
 
  • #13
rollingstein said:
What's Jackson? :confused:
It is a graduate electrodynamics text. I never seem to have a paper problem when doing math problems but when it comes to physics problems the paper just runs out before I can even finish the problem. I have OCD when it comes to writing down solutions and even if it's a draft and I make a small mistake I have a need to throw it all out and start over. What's up with that :tongue2: One problem I have with notation is different professors seem to be ok / not ok with different things e.g. some professors for some reason seem hate when I use the very common and very pretty notation [itex]\partial _{\mu }[/itex] so I have to consciously refrain from doing that. I'm not sure how other people here or elsewhere cope with that.
 

1. What are the common personal writing conventions when doing physics/math calculations?

The most common personal writing conventions when doing physics/math calculations include using clear and legible handwriting, writing equations in a consistent format (e.g. using proper notation and symbols), labeling all variables and quantities, and showing all steps of the calculation.

2. How should I approach solving math problems in physics?

When solving math problems in physics, it is important to first read and understand the problem, identify the known and unknown quantities, choose an appropriate equation to solve for the unknown quantity, and then plug in the values and solve step by step.

3. Is it necessary to show all steps of the calculation in physics/math problems?

Yes, it is important to show all steps of the calculation in physics/math problems. This not only helps you keep track of your work and avoid mistakes, but it also allows others to follow and understand your thought process and approach to solving the problem.

4. What are some common math conventions specific to physics problems?

Some common math conventions specific to physics problems include using scientific notation for very large or small numbers, using standard units of measurement, and being aware of significant figures when rounding off final answers.

5. How can I improve my personal writing and math conventions when doing physics/math calculations?

To improve your personal writing and math conventions when doing physics/math calculations, you can practice regularly, pay attention to details and accuracy, seek feedback from others, and familiarize yourself with common notation and symbols used in physics and math.

Similar threads

  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
758
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
10
Views
838
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
3
Views
325
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
29
Views
389
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
8
Views
822
Back
Top