You are Here: Home >< Maths

# Co-prime Notation

Announcements Posted on
Why bother with a post grad? Are they even worth it? Have your say! 26-10-2016
1. Quick question. Say you're proving is irrational or something similar, can you express as ? We weren't taught the notation, so not sure if I'm using it correctly.
2. I've never seen it before, but Wikipedia appears to use it. Personally I write instead of , and so I'd just write . Little confusion will be caused by this notation in a number theoretic context.
3. (Original post by nuodai)
I've never seen it before, but Wikipedia appears to use it. Personally I write instead of , and so I'd just write . Little confusion will be caused by this notation in a number theoretic context.
Ah, I thought it might be standard notation and wanted the proof to look a bit more professional. Perhaps I should stick to the former if he hasn't taught it this way.
4. (Original post by Brit_Miller)
Ah, I thought it might be standard notation and wanted the proof to look a bit more professional. Perhaps I should stick to the former if he hasn't taught it this way.
If you're doing something for uni (e.g. exam, coursework), don't introduce notation which isn't in your course unless you explain what it is first. If you were to say "write to denote " then that would be fine, but you shouldn't assume that an examiner will know what you mean if the notation isn't introduced in your lecture notes.
5. (Original post by nuodai)
If you're doing something for uni (e.g. exam, coursework), don't introduce notation which isn't in your course unless you explain what it is first. If you were to say "write to denote " then that would be fine, but you shouldn't assume that an examiner will know what you mean if the notation isn't introduced in your lecture notes.
Aye, I'll definitely just use the former. Thanks for the help!
6. (Original post by Brit_Miller)
Ah, I thought it might be standard notation and wanted the proof to look a bit more professional. Perhaps I should stick to the former if he hasn't taught it this way.
Professional mathematical writing eschews excessive symbology. It is a common mistake of the amateur to try and abbreviate everything. Nothing looks worse than, for example, statements abbreviated like the following: etc.

Just write ' and are coprime.'
7. (Original post by Jake22)
Professional mathematical writing eschews excessive symbology. It is a common mistake of the amateur to try and abbreviate everything. Nothing looks worse than, for example, statements abbreviated like the following: etc.

Just write ' and are coprime.'
Why do they teach us to write like that then?
8. (Original post by Brit_Miller)
Why do they teach us to write like that then?
For the purpose of making short hand notes or writing on blackboards. Quantifiers also have their use in defining, say, a predicated set that involves more than one quantifier.

I mean, you were presumably taught at primary school that one can abbreviate 'and' by using the ampersand symbol. I am sure that you were also made aware that in an essay or suchlike, you were still expected to use the full word 'and' rather than '&'. Same rules apply.

I don't think that anyone would suggest that you hand in a piece of written work with, for example, sentences that start with symbols.

Look in any maths book. They mostly use words - not just a collection of symbols. In the statement of lemmata, propositions and theorems in particular, one tends to use symbols and abbreviations only where it saves a lot of space and makes for increased readability.
9. (Original post by Jake22)
For the purpose of making short hand notes or writing on blackboards. Quantifiers also have their use in defining, say, a predicated set that involves more than one quantifier.

I mean, you were presumably taught at primary school that one can abbreviate 'and' by using the ampersand symbol. I am sure that you were also made aware that in an essay or suchlike, you were still expected to use the full word 'and' rather than '&'. Same rules apply.

I don't think that anyone would suggest that you hand in a piece of written work with, for example, sentences that start with symbols.

Look in any maths book. They mostly use words - not just a collection of symbols. In the statement of lemmata, propositions and theorems in particular, one tends to use symbols and abbreviations only where it saves a lot of space and makes for increased readability.
Our lecturer actually encouraged us to write our proofs using all the shorthand notation - though they're only short proofs. Maybe it's just to make sure we understand what they mean and use them correctly.
10. (Original post by Brit_Miller)
Our lecturer actually encouraged us to write our proofs using all the shorthand notation - though they're only short proofs. Maybe it's just to make sure we understand what they mean and use them correctly.
I would guess that your last sentence is the motivation - he is treating it as an exercise in familiarising yourselves with the notation.

## Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
1. this can't be left blank
2. this can't be left blank
3. this can't be left blank

6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

4. this can't be left empty
1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register

Updated: May 9, 2012
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Today on TSR

### Who is getting a uni offer this half term?

Find out which unis are hot off the mark here

Poll
Useful resources

### Maths Forum posting guidelines

Not sure where to post? Read here first

### How to use LaTex

Writing equations the easy way

### Study habits of A* students

Top tips from students who have already aced their exams