Opposites Attract: Understanding O Notation in Math & CS

  • Thread starter Thread starter Max.Planck
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cs Notation
Max.Planck
Messages
128
Reaction score
0
Hi, I noticed in mathematics the O symbol is used in the following way:

A term T is in O(x^p), if lim x->0 T/x^p=c, for a constant c.

While in computer science the O symbol is used is this way:

A term T is in O(x^p), if lim x->∞ T/x^p is a constant.

What gives, these two notations seem to be the complete opposite of each other?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The O symbol is valid in both cases. It is up to you to define what the x limit is.
 
mathman said:
The O symbol is valid in both cases. It is up to you to define what the x limit is.

But don't they contradict each other?

For example, in the first case x^7 is in O(x^5), but in the second case it is not.
 
No, they are just two distinct cases of a general concept. We should aways say "f(x)= O(g(x)) as x-> a and specify a. They are using two different values of a and so getting two different results.
 
HallsofIvy said:
No, they are just two distinct cases of a general concept. We should aways say "f(x)= O(g(x)) as x-> a and specify a. They are using two different values of a and so getting two different results.

Aha, thanks!
 
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