Mathematicians & Big O, Big Omega: Usage & Context

  • Thread starter Thread starter Swapnil
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Omega
Swapnil
Messages
459
Reaction score
6
Hi, I was wondering, do mathematicians (like computer scientists) use things like Big O, Big Omega, Little O, etc. a lot? If so, in what context?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
In asymptotic analysis.
 
Yep, asymptotic analysis accounts for most of it. It's also used to show the truncation of a (Taylor series) polynomial:

\sin(x)=x-\frac{x^3}{6}+O(x^5)
 
And isn't that, really, an expression for sin(x)'s asymptotic behaviour as x ambles peacefully off towards the origin?:wink:

(If you write sin(x) with an explicit remainder term, say, by utilization of the mean-value theorem for integrals, then it is of course something different, but we wouldn't use O's in that case).
 
Last edited:
arildno said:
And isn't that, really, an expression for sin(x)'s asymptotic behaviour as x ambles peacefully off towards the origin?:wink:

Oh yes absolutely. It's just a different way of thinking about it.
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
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