Overloaded equal sign = and the word is

  • Thread starter Thread starter Alain De Vos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sign
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the overloaded nature of the equal sign "=" in mathematics and the word "is" in language, raising questions about their various meanings. Participants explore whether there is a comprehensive list of meanings for these terms and discuss alternatives like ":=" for definitions. While some argue that the equal sign is clear in expressions like "2 + 3 = 5," others note that it can lead to ambiguity in more complex contexts, such as isomorphism or congruence. It is highlighted that in typeset math, specific symbols like \equiv and \cong are used to avoid confusion. Overall, the consensus is that while the equal sign may seem overloaded in ASCII math, it maintains a singular meaning in formal mathematical notation.
Alain De Vos
Messages
35
Reaction score
1
Problem,the equal symbol "=" in math is overloaded , as is the word "is" in language.
Is there a list of all the meanings of = in math and the word is.
For instance "is" can mean equal to , or element of a set.
Are there generally accepted alternatives to the "=" sign, so one can be more specific.
For instance := for equal per definition.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Why is it a problem that it's used extensively? As long as there is no ambiguity revolving around its use, I don't see how it could be a problem.
 
Notation is simply about communicating ideas. So in an expression like 2 + 3 = 5, it's pretty clear what "=" denotes. When talking about isomorphism, congruence or some other type of "equality", :=, ≡, ⇔, ≈, etc. are used accordingly.

I find there's no need to be more specific. Mathematics is perfectly scrutinizing as it is (I don't mean that in a bad way). These are just symbols; a good math paper would be sure that there's no ambiguity in notation.

By the way, you wouldn't say "x is S" to mean x ∈ S, right? You would say "x is in S".
 
Alain De Vos said:
Problem,the equal symbol "=" in math is overloaded , as is the word "is" in language.
Is there a list of all the meanings of = in math and the word is.
For instance "is" can mean equal to , or element of a set.
Are there generally accepted alternatives to the "=" sign, so one can be more specific.
For instance := for equal per definition.

Actually, = is never overloaded in math.

It's an assignment operator in some programming languages; but every language that uses = for assignment uses == for equality, so there's confusion sometimes, but never overloading within a programming language or within math.

In typeset math they use \equiv for mod equivalence, and \cong for isomorphism. They never use = for anything but equality, as far as I know. Of course I could be wrong ... but I really don't think there are many alternate meanings or usage of = in math.

I think the main area where = is overloaded is in writing ASCII math, since there aren't any symbols for congruence, isomorphism, etc.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top