• Posts
  • RSS
  • ◂◂RSS
  • Contact

  • 'Freezing' symbols in mathematical notation

    October 22nd, 2009
    notation  [html]
    I just read How To Write Mathematics by paul halmos (1970). I agree with most of it, but one part (5: Thinking About The Alphabet) I'm not convinced on. He writes:

    Mathematics has access to a potentially infinite alphabet (c.g x', x'', x''', ...), but, in practice, only a small finite fragment of it is usable. One reason is that a human being's ability to distinguish between symbols is very much more limited than his ability to conceive of new ones: another reason is the bad habit of freezing letters. Some ols-fashioned analysts would speak of "xyz-space", meaning, I think, 3-dimensional Euclidian space, plus the convention that a point of that space shall always be denoted by "(x,y,z)". This is bad: it "freezes" x, and y, and z, i.e., prohibits their use in another context, and, at the same time, it make it impossible (or, in any case, inconsistent) to use, say, "(a,b,c)" when "(x,y,z)" has been temporarily exhausted. Modern versions of the custom exist, and are no better. Example: matrices with "property L" -- a frozen and unsuggestive designation.

    There are other awkward and unhelpful ways to use letters: "CW complexes" and "CCR groups" are examples. A related curiosity occurs in Lefschetz. There, x^p_i is a chain of demension p with index i, wheras x^i_p is a co-chain of dimension p wiith index i. Question: what is x^2_3?

    As history progresses, more and more symbols get frozen. The standard examples are e, i, pi, and, of course, 0, 1, 2, 3, .... (Who would dare write "Let 6 be a group."?) A few other letters are almost frozen: many readers would feel offended if "n" were used for a complex number, lowercase epsilon for a positive integer, and "z" for a topological space. (A mathematician's nightmare is a sequence n sub lowercase epsilon that tends to zero as epsilon becomes infinite.)

    Moral: do not increase the rigid frigidity. Think about the alphabet. It's a nuisance, but it's worth it. To save time and trouble later, think about the alphabet for an hour now; then start writing.

    The concept of "almost frozen" symbols started being interesting to me once I learned to program. I thought: this is neat; the mathematicians are putting type information in the variable names. Sort of like BASIC (where A is a number, $A is a string, ...). I really like that I can pretty much count on 'n' being a natural number because it makes expressions much easier to read. Someone can just write write "let m = 3n" and without any messy type declarations ("where n is any natural number") I can see that m is divisible by 3. Hamos objects to this thing I'd always thought of as a neat way that mathematical communication was efficient, calling it "frigid rigidity". yikes.

    The main part of "almost frozen" symbols that I like is that they make notation more consistent between writers. If everyone uses f to name an abstract function, then it's easier to interpret f in new writing, but fstarts to freeze to that meaning. The reason hamos does not want us to "increase this rigid frigidity" is that "in practice, only a small finite fragment of [the infinite alphabet] is usable." I see this as a tradeoff between running out of symbols and consistency between authors. As long as we're willing to reclaim previously frozen symbols when the fall out of use (which his "xyz-space" example suggests we are) we shouldn't have to worry about running out of symbols.

    Comment via: facebook

    Recent posts on blogs I like:

    Who Should Bear the Risk in Infrastructure Projects?

    The answer to the question is the public sector, always. It’s okay to have private-sector involvement in construction, but the risk must be borne by the public sector, or else the private sector will just want more money to compensate for the extra risk. …

    via Pedestrian Observations November 30, 2020

    Fireside Friday, November 27, 2020

    Hey folks! Fireside this week. A bit of a change-up in terms of the coming attractions. I had planned to start “Textiles, How Did They Make It?” next, but I want to do a bit more reading on some of the initial stages of textile production (that is, the pr…

    via A Collection of Unmitigated Pedantry November 27, 2020

    Thoughts you mightn't have thunk about remote meetings

    Welcome to this week's edition of "building a startup in 2020," in which all your meetings are suddenly remote, and you probably weren't prepared for it. I know I wasn't. We started a "fully remote" company back in 2019, but …

    via apenwarr November 23, 2020

    more     (via openring)


  • Posts
  • RSS
  • ◂◂RSS
  • Contact