Is (a,a) a Better Notation for Representing an Empty Set Than [a,a]?

  • Thread starter Thread starter StephenPrivitera
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Convention
AI Thread Summary
The notation [a,a] is generally accepted to represent the set containing the single element {a}, while (a,a) is interpreted as the empty set. The discussion highlights that using (a,a) raises questions about its appropriateness, particularly since it suggests a lack of elements. The context of intervals is important, as [a,b] is typically used to indicate a range where b can equal a. The argument is made that (a,a) could be preferred over {} to denote emptiness in certain mathematical contexts. Ultimately, the choice of notation can influence interpretation and clarity in mathematical expressions.
StephenPrivitera
Messages
360
Reaction score
0
Is the closed interval [a,a] considered a legitimate notation for the set {a}? Would (a,a) denote the empty set?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
[a,a] is used- usually in something like [a,b] where you want to consider the possibility that b= a.

If I came across reference to an interval like (a,a), I probably would interpret it as the empty set- although I would wonder why they picked a!
 
A={x : f(x)<0 on [a,x]}
Is a in A? It is if f(x)<0 on [a,a]. And since [a,a] has only one number, it suffices to show that f(a)<0.

A={x : f(x)<0 on (a,x)}
Is a in A? It is if f(x)<0 on (a,a). But this is kind of nonsense. There is nothing in (a,a). You make the call.

So anyway, I just wanted to point this out to show why you might write (a,a) rather than {}.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
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...
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