Notation question, $x=1,2,3...$ or $x\in \mathbb N$?

232 Views Asked by At

On my recent exam, my professor wrote a note saying that the following notation shouldn't be used when discussing domains, and I'm not sure why it matters. So, my question:

I'll use a specific example, but I'm speaking generally when it comes to notation. When given a function of the form:

$$f(x) = \cases{ g(x) & if $x=1,2,3,...$ \\ h(x) & if $ x= -1, -2, -3, ..$} $$

Is it incorrect to write it as:

$$f(x) = \cases{ g(x) & if $x\in \mathbb N$ \\ h(x) & if $ x\in \mathbb Z<0$} $$

I've always been curious why this notation isn't used in textbooks, and my professors comment on my exam peaked my curiosity enough to post it here.


EDIT: I should mention I come from a physics and engineering background, not mathematics.


Thank you!

1

There are 1 best solutions below

0
On BEST ANSWER

Ignoring the question of zero's status w.r.t. $\mathbb{N}$: There is some flexibility and looseness in notation that most people will allow, but $$x \in \mathbb{Z} \lt 0$$ just doesn't work (for me).

Here's why: people often write $$ a R_1 b R_2 c$$ as an abbreviation of $$a R_1 b \text{ and } b R_2 c,$$ where $a$, $b$, and $c$ are variables or constants and $R_1$ and $R_2$ are binary relation. So you can write $a \lt b \lt c$ to mean $a\lt b$ and $b \lt c$, or even $0 \lt x \in \mathbb{R}$ to mean $0 \lt x$ and $x \in \mathbb{R}$, but your expression leaves me with $\mathbb{R} \lt 0$ for the second half, which is either confusing or nonsensical.

I guess you could stay within the limits I've prescribed and write it as $$ 0 \gt x \in \mathbb{N},$$ which, if I came across, I would think "Hmm, that's a little weird, never seen it before" but it would be clear to me what you meant. Math is a language and there are lots of sentences that are grammatical and you could write, but people generally don't write. So using them adds a bit of unnecessary confusion that it's probably better to avoid if you can.

Regardless, I find your first way of writing it more straight forward and would prefer it. It also lets you avoid all the hubbub about $0 \in \mathbb{N}$ versus $0 \notin \mathbb{N}$ that you see in the comments.