Understanding Ambiguous Notation in Math

  • Thread starter Thread starter tony873004
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Notation
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of ambiguous mathematical notation, specifically focusing on the integral \(\int {x^2 \sin \pi x\,dx}\). Participants are exploring different possible meanings of the notation and how it could be clarified.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the intended meaning of the notation, considering interpretations such as \(\int {x^2 \sin \left( \pi x \right)\,dx}\) versus \(\int {x^3 \sin \left( \pi \right)\,dx}\). Some express confusion over the lack of parentheses in certain expressions and how that affects interpretation.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of different interpretations of the notation, with some participants suggesting that the integral should be understood as \(\int {x^2 \sin \left( \pi x \right)\,dx}\). Others reflect on the variability of notation in mathematical texts and how it can lead to different interpretations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the ambiguity in notation can lead to misunderstandings, particularly when parentheses are omitted. There is also mention of how textbooks may present similar equations in various forms to encourage understanding of equivalence.

tony873004
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
1,753
Reaction score
143

Homework Statement


[tex]\int {x^2 \sin \pi x\,dx}[/tex]

What does this mean?
This:
[tex]\int {x^2 \sin \left( \pi \right)x\,dx}[/tex], in which case why didn't they write [tex]\int {x^3 \sin \left( \pi \right)\,dx}[/tex]

Or this:
[tex]\int {x^2 \sin \left( {\pi x} \right)\,dx}[/tex], which I'm guessing is right, except that in a previous chapter I interpreted [tex]\sec \theta \,\tan \theta[/tex] to be [tex] \left( {\sec \theta } \right)\,\left( {\tan \theta } \right)[/tex]

instead of
[tex] \sec \left( {\theta \,\tan \theta } \right)[/tex]






Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


 
Physics news on Phys.org
I agree with both of your interpretations. Meaning sec(theta*tan(theta)) without parenthesizing is bizarre.
 
In my experience books and particularly textbooks for study often play around with similar equations and present them in different ways, to get you used to the idea that they are indeed the same, and there are many ways of presenting equations.

It's kind of analogous to:-

[tex]\dot{x}(t)[/tex]

[tex]\frac{dy}{dx}[/tex]

[tex]\frac{d^2y}{dx^2}[/tex]

[tex]f'(x)[/tex]

[tex]f''(x)[/tex]

They like to insert different forms of the same thing to make you think about equivalence and other ways of expressing the form of equations.

Or this:
[tex]\int {x^2 \sin \left( {\pi x} \right)\,dx}[/tex], which I'm guessing is right, except that in a previous chapter I interpreted [tex]\sec \theta \,\tan \theta[/tex] to be [tex] \left( {\sec \theta } \right)\,\left( {\tan \theta } \right)[/tex]

instead of
[tex] \sec \left( {\theta \,\tan \theta } \right)[/tex]

they are not the same as far as I can see. I guess if your going to interpret something make it equivalent in any form, if it isn't then you've made an interpretational error.


[tex]\sec \left( {\theta \,\tan \theta } \right)[/tex]

[tex]=\sec\theta\sec\tan\theta}[/tex]

not

[tex] \left( {\sec \theta } \right)\,\left( {\tan \theta } \right)[/tex]
 
Last edited:
I'm fairly sure your book means [tex]\int {x^2 \sin \left( {\pi x} \right)\,dx}[/tex], otherwise you would be integrating (0)x³!
 
Last edited:
ChaoticLlama said:
I'm fairly sure your book means [tex]\int {x^2 \sin \left( {\pi x} \right)\,dx}[/tex], otherwise you would be integrating (0)x³!

Yeah I notice a lot of people don't put say log(x) they put log x or say x^2.sin x instead using the notation x^2.sin(x) ? It's equivalent though. I'm sure that's what they mean. Looking around this forum alone shows a lot of variation between notation methods.
 
Schrödinger's Dog said:
[tex]\sec \left( {\theta \,\tan \theta } \right)[/tex]

[tex]=\sec\theta\sec\tan\theta}[/tex]

This isn't true. Take [itex]\theta=\frac{\pi}{4}[/itex], then [tex]\sec (\theta\tan\theta)=\sec(\frac{\pi}{4}\cdot 1)=\sec(\frac{\pi}{4}). \hspace{1cm} \sec\theta\sec(\tan\theta)=\sec\frac{\pi}{4}\sec(1)[/tex]. Since sec(1)≠1, the identity cannot hold for all theta.
 
cristo said:
This isn't true. Take [itex]\theta=\frac{\pi}{4}[/itex], then [tex]\sec (\theta\tan\theta)=\sec(\frac{\pi}{4}\cdot 1)=\sec(\frac{\pi}{4}). \hspace{1cm} \sec\theta\sec(\tan\theta)=\sec\frac{\pi}{4}\sec(1)[/tex]. Since sec(1)≠1, the identity cannot hold for all theta.

That's true, I was thinking of something else. same with sin(xcos(x)) my bad. Anyway, I think the intepretation that was given above is likely correct, my idiotic explanation aside :/ I'd go with post no 4.
 
Last edited:
In my experience, we include brackets when the expression we are writing is written in an unconventional way. For example, no one would look twice at sinx being anything other than sin(x). In the same way, I would write [itex]\sin\pi x[/itex]without brackets, since if we were wanting to say sin(pi)x, we would write [itex]x\sin\pi[/itex]. So, as the OP says, if it were meant to say [itex]x^2\sin(\pi)x[/itex], then we would write this as [itex]x^3\sin\pi[/itex]

In a similar way, [tex]\sec\theta\tan\theta[/itex] is taken to mean [itex](\sec\theta)(\tan\theta)[/itex].[/tex]
 
Thanks for all the replies

ChaoticLlama said:
I'm fairly sure your book means [tex]\int {x^2 \sin \left( {\pi x} \right)\,dx}[/tex], otherwise you would be integrating (0)x³!

I figured this out when I tried it both ways. :biggrin:
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K