What Does the Dot Mean in a Function Like f(x,·,·)?

AI Thread Summary
The notation f(x,·,·) indicates a function with three variables where the focus is on the dependence of the output on the first variable, x. The dots represent arbitrary values for the other arguments, allowing for generalization in mathematical discussions. This notation is useful in contexts where specific values are not important, such as in proofs or general theorems involving functions. It allows mathematicians to express concepts without specifying the exact nature of the other variables. Overall, this notation serves to simplify discussions about functions with multiple arguments.
Mathematics news on Phys.org
In the example you give f(x,.,.), the dependence on x is of interest, keeping in mind that f is a function of 3 variables.
 
mathman said:
In the example you give f(x,.,.), the dependence on x is of interest, keeping in mind that f is a function of 3 variables.

So you could substitute arbitrary values for the other arguments with no effect?

Would this be proper (albeit useless) example of usage?
Let function f map R x R to R be defined as f(x,·) = x + 4.

I've always been used to seeing,
Let y be in R. Let function f map R x R to R be defined as f(x,y) = x + 4.
 
The real value of the notation is when you don't care at all what sort of object the "dot" represents.

In elementary algebra, you use variables like "x" to mean "any object of some type" - for example "any real number".

If you want to prove a general theorem in mathematical logic about "all possible functions with 3 arguments, regardless of what the functions actually do or what types of arguments they have", then you need notations to represent ideas like "a general example of such a function", or "any possible values of the first argument of such a function".

That is one use for notations like f(.,.,.) and the "x" part of f(x,.,.).
 
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 Pythagorus'
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