B Tips on writing a formula in rigorous way

serbring
Messages
267
Reaction score
2
Dear,

I am writing a report of a tool I have developed where there is a chapter with all the formulas included in the tool. I have a formula like the following:

P(l,1)=\sum_k PF(k,l)

but P(l,1) contains the sum of all the positive PFs, while P(l,2) contains the sum of all the negative PFs. Is there any elegant/rigorous way to write the formula?

thanks best regards
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
With the Heaviside function: $$P(l,1)=\sum_k PF(k,l) \Theta(PF(k,l))$$
A bit ugly but compact:$$P(l,1)=\sum_{k,PF(k,l)>0} PF(k,l)$$
Maybe like this:$$P(l,1)=\sum_k \begin{cases} PF(k,l) &\mbox{if } PF(k,l)> 0 \\
0 & \mbox{else } \end{cases} $$
If you need this type of sum often, you could introduce it and then shorten it to $$P(l,1)=\sum_k PF(k,l)\: \mbox {where}\: PF(k,l)>0$$
 
  • Like
Likes jedishrfu
Wow! How many options! Thanks

The first one is very elegant, I like it, but not fully clear for everyone. I would go for the last one!
 
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top