Confusion with definition and notation of reciprocal.

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the definition and notation of the multiplicative inverse, specifically how the reciprocal of a rational number a/b is defined as b/a. Participants clarify that the notation 1/x represents the operation of dividing 1 by x, rather than being a unique symbol. The relationship ab=1 is emphasized, indicating that if a is non-zero, b can be derived as 1/a through division. The conversation highlights that the confusion primarily lies in the interpretation of notation rather than the underlying mathematical concept. Ultimately, the distinction between notation and mathematical operations is key to understanding the reciprocal.
infranatural
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone,

I have some conceptual issues with aforementioned definitions.

How is exactly multiplicative inverse defined? Say, for a rational, nonzero number a/b, its reciprocal is b/a. Is there a certain operation that transforms a/b to b/a?

Also, the notation for multiplicative inverse of any real number (except zero) x is 1/x. Is 1/x a unique symbol or one that indicates operation of division of 1 by x?
For example, if x=2/3, should i see its inverse as 1/x=3/2, or as an operation of division, that is 1/x=1/(2/3)? I know that in the end the answer is the same, but what i'd like to know is if division is included in the "process" of obtaining that inverse or is it by definition that we just "flip" the numbers.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hey,

a^-b

(a "raised to" -b)

Or do you mean an alternative way to this too?
 
The Jericho said:
Hey,

a^-b

(a "raised to" -b)

Or do you mean an alternative way to this too?

No, no, a/b, a rational number, where a is some nonzero integer, and b is a natural number. No exponentiation here.
 
If a is any non-zero number then its reciprocal is defined as the number, b, such that ab= 1.

"Is 1/x a unique symbol or one that indicates operation of division of 1 by x?" Yes, it indicate division of 1 by x. If ab= 1, and a is not 0, we can divide both sides by a to get b= 1/a.

Your question seems to be more about notation than mathematics.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
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...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top