I was working on this cute math notation the other day. Curious if anybody knows a better way or if I am overcomplicating this.
Say you have z:=c∗x2∗y. And you want m:=dz/dx=2∗c∗x∗y to be some particular value.
Sometimes you can control x, sometimes you can control y, and you can always easily measure z. So you might use these forms of the equation:
m=2∗c∗x∗y=2∗z/x=2∗√c∗y∗z
It’s kind of confusing that m seems proportional to both z and √z. So here’s where the notation comes in. Can write above like
m(x=x,y=y,z=?)=2∗c∗x∗y m(x=x,y=?,z=z)=2∗z/x m(x=?,y=y,z=z)=2∗√c∗y∗z
Which seems a lot clearer to me.
And you could shorten it to m(x,y,?), m(x,?,z), and m(?,y,z).
I was working on this cute math notation the other day. Curious if anybody knows a better way or if I am overcomplicating this.
Say you have z:=c∗x2∗y. And you want m:=dz/dx=2∗c∗x∗y to be some particular value.
Sometimes you can control x, sometimes you can control y, and you can always easily measure z. So you might use these forms of the equation:
m=2∗c∗x∗y=2∗z/x=2∗√c∗y∗z
It’s kind of confusing that m seems proportional to both z and √z. So here’s where the notation comes in. Can write above like
m(x=x,y=y,z=?)=2∗c∗x∗y m(x=x,y=?,z=z)=2∗z/x m(x=?,y=y,z=z)=2∗√c∗y∗z
Which seems a lot clearer to me.
And you could shorten it to m(x,y,?), m(x,?,z), and m(?,y,z).