What does \sum\limits_{i\neq j}^N a_i a_j mean in summation notation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SergeantAngle
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Notation Summation
SergeantAngle
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi

I have a textbook which uses the notation:

\sum\limits_{i\neq j}^N a_i a_j

I can't find anywhere what this actually means. Is it equivalent to:

\sum\limits_{i}^N \sum\limits_{j}^N a_i a_j

where j can't equal i?

Thanks.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
It's just the sum of all ##a_{i}a_{j}## when i does not equal j.

You can put pretty much any condition you want in that space, though I see it abused more often for unions and intersections of sets.
 
SergeantAngle said:
Hi

I have a textbook which uses the notation:

\sum\limits_{i\neq j}^N a_i a_j

I can't find anywhere what this actually means. Is it equivalent to:

\sum\limits_{i}^N \sum\limits_{j}^N a_i a_j

where j can't equal i?

Thanks.

Yes, pretty much. For example, if N = 3, and both indexes start at 1, then the summation expands to a1a2 + a1a3 + a2a1 + a1a3 + a2a3 + a3a2. The terms that are omitted are a12, a22, and a32.
 
Okay, 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