LSQ Notation: Unusual Notation Explained by Herget 1948

  • Thread starter Thread starter solarblast
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Notation
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on understanding the unusual notation used in Herget's 1948 LSQ method, specifically in equations (129) and (130). The notation (aa) and (ab) is clarified, indicating that (aa) x corresponds to the summation of squared terms, while (ab) y represents the summation of products of two variables. It is suggested that simplifying the weights in equation (130) can help clarify the notation in equation (129). Participants express confusion over the notation but find equation (130) provides a clearer understanding. Overall, the thread seeks to demystify Herget's notation for better comprehension of the LSQ method.
solarblast
Messages
146
Reaction score
2
See the two pages I've attached. 47 and 48. I'm trying to understand the notation used for the (129) equations. A hint is just below the equations. ( ) ∑. These pages are describing the LSQ method. (aa), etc. aa doesn't make sense to me. Herget devised this notation in 1948.

Comments
 

Attachments

  • LSQ-Pg47.jpg
    LSQ-Pg47.jpg
    39.5 KB · Views: 485
  • LSQ-Pg48.jpg
    LSQ-Pg48.jpg
    33 KB · Views: 484
Mathematics news on Phys.org
solarblast said:
See the two pages I've attached. 47 and 48. I'm trying to understand the notation used for the (129) equations. A hint is just below the equations. ( ) ∑. These pages are describing the LSQ method. (aa), etc. aa doesn't make sense to me. Herget devised this notation in 1948.

Comments
It's not very clear, but the stuff in (130) gives a better idea. For example, the notations (aa) x and (ab) y mean, respectively,
$$ x \sum_{i = 1}^n (a_i)^2$$
and
$$ y \sum_{i = 1}^n a_i b_i$$
 
The notation is unfamiliar to me but it's written in a more common form in Eq. 130. Just set all the weights to one in Eq. 130 to find Eq. 129 with explicit summations.
 
Sounds about right.
 
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...
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...
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