Missing multiplication symbol: Difference between revisions
From Why start at x, y, z
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
But sometimes it's not as clear: | But sometimes it's not as clear: | ||
Does \( a(b+1) = a \times (b+1)\), or is \(a\) a function? | Does \( a(b+1) = a \times (b+1)\), or is \(a\) a function?<ref>[https://twitter.com/christianp/status/798843905231888385 Tweet by Christian Lawson-Perfect]</ref> | ||
When writing a division on one line, does an implied multiplication bind more tightly than an explicit one?<ref>[https://twitter.com/christianp/status/1320650593241866241 Twitter thread by Christian Lawson-Perfect]</ref> | When writing a division on one line, does an implied multiplication bind more tightly than an explicit one?<ref>[https://twitter.com/christianp/status/1320650593241866241 Twitter thread by Christian Lawson-Perfect]</ref> | ||
Revision as of 10:09, 2 July 2021
It's common to omit a multiplication symbol:
\(ab = a \times b\)
But sometimes it's not as clear:
Does \( a(b+1) = a \times (b+1)\), or is \(a\) a function?[1]
When writing a division on one line, does an implied multiplication bind more tightly than an explicit one?[2]
Is \(a/bc\) equivalent to \(\frac{a}{bc}\) or \(\frac{a}{b}c\)?
There seems to be an unwritten rule "juxtaposition is stickier".
But that might not apply when there are numbers involved: almost everyone would interpret \(2/3x\) as \(\frac{2}{3}x\) instead of \(\frac{2}{3x}\)
The "juxtaposition is stickier" rule only seems to break ties, not override the normal order of operations:
\[ ab^2 = a \times (b^2) \]
