What is the proper way to read subscripts in Mathematics?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter GPhab
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mathematics
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the proper way to read subscripts in mathematical expressions, particularly in the context of functions with multiple arguments. Participants explore potential confusions that arise from different notations, such as L_n(X) versus Ln(X), and how to articulate these expressions clearly to avoid misunderstandings.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that L_n(X) can be confused with Ln(X), highlighting the potential for ambiguity in notation.
  • Another participant clarifies that L_n(X) should be read as "L sub n" or "L index n," while Ln(X) refers to the natural logarithm.
  • A further contribution mentions that the notation for the natural logarithm is typically written upright, such as \ln(x) or \operatorname{Ln}(x), to distinguish it from other functions.
  • One participant expresses a preference for articulating the entire expression to avoid confusion, providing examples of how they would read derivatives and logarithmic functions aloud.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying preferences for how to read mathematical expressions, with no consensus on a single "proper" way. Some advocate for specific phrases to reduce confusion, while others have different approaches.

Contextual Notes

There may be limitations in the discussion regarding the context in which certain notations are used, as well as the assumptions about the audience's familiarity with mathematical conventions.

GPhab
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
What is the proper way to read subscripts in Mathematics? Sometimes we come across functions with two arguments, where one of them is indicated using subscripts and in such situations, there is scope for confusion.
Eg:[tex]L_n[/tex](X) can be confused with Ln(X)
We can produce many more examples like this
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I suppose you mean [tex]L_n(X)[/tex] can be confused with [tex]Ln(X)[/tex]
 
one is imply Ln, the other is "L sub n" or "L index n"
 
Also, when [tex]Ln(x)[/tex] refers to the logarithm (natural base) it is usually written upright, as in [tex]\ln(x)[/tex] or [tex]\operatorname{Ln}(x)[/tex]. Usually, only certain standard functions have more than one letter, at least, I rarely call my functions other than [tex]f(x), \phi(z), \Psi(\vec r), \cdots[/tex], never fn(x), crv(x, y, z) or wf(r) :smile:

[edit]I just consciously read the topic title -- my above post doesn't really make sense does it?
In your example, if I had to read the equation out to someone and confusion might arise, I'd probably use "L sub n" for one and "log" for the other. :smile:
[/edit]
 
Last edited:
I actually say out the whole thing, it irritates all my friends >.< Eg [tex]\frac{d}{dx} f(x)[/tex]. My friends say "dee- dee x, eff, x" and i say "The derivative of eff x with respect to x". For this example it would be "The Natural Logarithm of x" as opposed to "The function L sub n, evaluated at x".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K