Logic

before doing for example x=y , musn't I define it before as x=y and then do in my solution's analysis x=y ?! I mean how can I assume that x=y which I didn't define before x=:y !

is "=" implicitly defining the variable that I'm using?!
I tried to avoid complexity in my original answer. The = sign has slightly different technical meanings in different contexts, but it always mean that two things can be treated as being the same for the purpose that is relevant.

In arithmetic and elementary algebra, we are interested in numeric value. So there the = sign means that two variables have the same numeric value. So if I know that x = y (meaning that they have the same numeric value), it makes no difference numerically which is used. It is really that simple.

Now how do I know that two expressions represent the same numeric value?

They may have been defined to do so as in

[MATH]\text {Let } x = \dfrac{u^2 - 1}{v^2 + 1}.[/MATH]
You can use x in place of the fraction.

You may have proved that two values are necessarily the same. For example, you can prove that

[MATH]a^2 + b^2 = c^2 \implies |c| = \sqrt{a^2 + b^2}.[/MATH]
Or it may be imposed as a condition of a problem. For example,

[MATH]\text {Given } f = \dfrac{9c}{5} + 32, \text { where does } f = c.[/MATH]
So in this case, we are asking about a special case where f = c even though that is usually false.

[MATH]\text {If } f = c, \text { then } = \dfrac{9c}{5} + 32 \implies f = \dfrac{9f}{5} + 32 \implies 5f = 9f + 160 \implies[/MATH]
[MATH]9f - 5f = -\ 160 \implies f = -\ 40 = c.[/MATH]
HOWEVER you come to know that x = y, you can THEREAFTER replace x with y or replace y by x. In particular if you know x = y and y = z, you can replace y in the second equation to get x = z.
 
Last edited:
I tried to avoid complexity in my original answer. The = sign has slightly different technical meanings in different contexts, but it always mean that two things can be treated as being the same for the purpose that is relevant.

In arithmetic and elementary algebra, we are interested in numeric value. So there the = sign means that two variables have the same numeric value. So if I know that x = y (meaning that they have the same numeric value), it makes no difference numerically which is used. It is really that simple.

Now how do I know that two expressions represent the same numeric value?

They may have been defined to do so as in

[MATH]\text {Let } x = \dfrac{u^2 - 1}{v^2 + 1}.[/MATH]
You can use x in place of the fraction.

You may have proved that two values are necessarily the same. For example, you can prove that

[MATH]a^2 + b^2 = c^2 \implies |c| = \sqrt{a^2 + b^2}.[/MATH]
Or it may be imposed as a condition of a problem. For example,

[MATH]\text {Given } f = \dfrac{9c}{5} + 32, \text { where does } f = c.[/MATH]
So in this case, we are asking about a special case where f = c even though that is usually false.

[MATH]\text {If } f = c, \text { then } = \dfrac{9c}{5} + 32 \implies f = \dfrac{9f}{5} + 32 \implies 5f = 9f + 160 \implies[/MATH]
[MATH]9f - 5f = -\ 160 \implies f = -\ 40 = c.[/MATH]
HOWEVER you come to know that x = y, you can THEREAFTER replace x with y or replace y by x. In particular if you know x = y and y = z, you can replace y in the second equation to get x = z.


I'm totally with you, but then what's the purpose of "=:" which it's for definitions ! ?! I can say x =: y is the same as x=y..what's wrong with?
 
What's wrong is that

[MATH]x =: y \implies x = y[/MATH], but

[MATH]x = y \not \implies x = y:.[/MATH]
Remember that I said there were a number of different situation where it makes sense to say x = y. Only one of those situations involves definition.

Now I agree that in many cases people mean

[MATH]x \equiv y[/MATH] when they say [MATH]x = y.[/MATH]
Because [MATH]x \equiv y \implies x = y[/MATH],

that informal usage seldom causes any harm whatsoever.

I must admit that you seem to be doing your best to create confusion where none need exist.
 
Last edited:
Hi guys, I'm totally confused on that thing and by you guys I believe that I succeed to understand whole math problems (implicitly)

lets assume it's given like this : F(x)=1/(2*x +3)
so if I have arrived to an equation like 1 / (2*3y +3) , so here x=3y ! how is that right? I mean if it could be
1 / (2*y +3) then yeah I can say that x=y ! I'm fine with this, but how actually x=3y ? isn't the pattern of writing x in the prime equation say that we are "just" looking at x as concrete and not general? I mean cosmetics it's x, but x couldn't be represented as 2x also or 3x ? the matter that we are looking implicitly at x in general or what?! I mean in general which x could be 2x also or 4x or 10000000000000000000000000000x and it's still called "x" that we can assign it in the equation instead of prime x?! if yes, then why? it's eyes like something not identical to x, I mean 1000000000000000000x isn't identical to x ?!
 
That is quite incoherent.

Letters are used to represent different things.

You particularly need to understand the difference between an unknown and a variable.

An unknown represents one from a finite set of numbers, each of which satisfies an equation.

[MATH]x^2 - 9 = 0 \implies x = 3 \text { or } x = -\ 3.[/MATH]
So cannot be 100 or 19 or anything but one of those two numbers.

A variable stands for any number in a given set, which may be an infinite set, without any further limitation.

[MATH]f(x) = \dfrac{1}{2x + 3}, \text { where } x \in \mathbb R \text { and } x \ne -\ 1.5.[/MATH]
We are saying there that the number specified by f(x) cannot be determined until one of the numbers in its domain is specified, any of the numbers in the domain can be specified.

[MATH]a,\ b \in \mathbb R \implies a * b = b * a.[/MATH]
We are saying that no matter which two real numbers you specify, the order in which they are multiplied has no effect on the resulting product.

The symbols chosen to represent unknowns and variables are arbitrary. They have no implicit meaning except as defined for a particular purpose.

[MATH]u,\ v \in \mathbb R \implies u * v = v * u[/MATH] means exactly the same thing as [MATH]a,\ b \in \mathbb R \implies a * b = b * a.[/MATH]
Finally, it was explained to you that x = y is true only under certain conditions. It is not in and of itself a true statement.

[MATH]f(x) = \dfrac{1}{2x + 3} \text { and } f(x) = \dfrac{1}{6y + 3} \implies x = 3y.[/MATH]
[MATH]f(x) \equiv \dfrac{1}{2x + 3} \implies f(x) \ne \dfrac{1}{3x + 3}.[/MATH]
It has been explained now to you that your questions are better posed in the context of specific texts or specific problems. As it is you jump around from idea to idea and confuse yourself.
 
it seem you guys didn't understand my point , all the point if I have like this
given f(x)=1/(2*x+4)
what's f(2x)?
I'm not accepting the idea that to assign instead of x , 2x in the equation ..that's my confusion !
so why it's correct to say that f(2x) is 1/(2*2x+4) ? in the equation above given f(x) and not given f(2x) !!!

how is reall x=2x?!!!!!!!

any help?! thanks alot !!
 
We certainly did not understand your point. Maybe instead of an incoherent rant, you could ask a straightforward question.

[MATH]f(x) = \dfrac{1}{2x + 4}.[/MATH]
This is a temporary definition. The right hand side says what you are to do with the argument (x for example, where x is any number in the domain).

[MATH]\therefore f(a) = \dfrac{1}{2a + 4} \text { if } a \text { is in the domain.}[/MATH]
[MATH]\therefore a = 2x \implies f(a) = \dfrac{1}{2a + 4} = \dfrac{1}{2(2x) + 4} = \dfrac{1}{4x + 4}.[/MATH]
[MATH]\text {BUT } a = 2x \implies f(2x) = \dfrac{1}{4x + 4}.[/MATH]
 
... it seem you guys didn't understand my point ...
We have to guess a lot in your threads because your rambling-style of writing (combined with very poor English skills) is very difficult to understand.

how is reall x=2x?!!!!!!!
That's not the meaning here. Moving from f(x) to f(2x) means the input has changed. (It does not mean the inputs are equal.)

2x means the input has doubled. What does the output look like, when the input is doubled?

Given:

f(
INPUT ) = 1 ÷ [ 2 ∙ INPUT + 4 ]

Now, double the input.

f( 2 INPUT ) = 1 ÷ [ 2 ∙ 2 INPUT + 4 ]

When the input is doubled, the output is 1/(4 INPUT + 4)

?
 
We have to guess a lot in your threads because your rambling-style of writing combined with poor English is very difficult to understand.


That's not the meaning here. Moving from f(x) to f(2x) means the input has changed. (It does not mean the inputs are equal.)

2x means the input has doubled. What does the output look like, when the input is doubled?

Given:

f(
INPUT ) = 1 ÷ [ 2 ∙ INPUT + 4 ]

Now, double the input.

f( 2 INPUT ) = 1 ÷ [ 2 ∙ 2 INPUT + 4 ]

When the input is doubled, the output is 1/(4 INPUT + 4)

If the input were halved, then the output would be 1/(INPUT + 4)

f(x/2) = 1/[(2)(x/2) + 4] = 1/[x + 4]

?

Sorry I'm still confused !
but the first equation is given for input as "INPUT" and not as "2*INPUT" ! ..so how I assign 2*INPUT in the function at all ?! and why am I replacing 2*INPUT instead of INPUT ! really weird !
 
[MATH]f(x) = \dfrac{1}{2x + 4} [/MATH]
MEANS


that whatever is inside the parentheses after f is to replace x in the formula to the right of the equal sign. It is an instruction on how to complete a formula.
 
… how [can] I assign 2*INPUT in the function at all …
We may input any expression we like, as long as it represents a value in the function's domain.

f(√3) \(\quad\) f(5z+4) \(\quad\) f(cos(k∙π/7)) \(\quad\) f(g(x))

… why am I [using] 2*INPUT instead of INPUT ! really weird !
I don't know why you started a thread about f(x) and f(2x). What were you looking at?

Given f(x), a textbook might ask students to find f(2x) just to practice symbolic reasoning. In that case, there's probably no real-world meaning. But, there are many situations in the real world where people would want to see what happens to a function's value, when its input is doubled.

Can you explain why you think doubling the input is really weird?

?
 
Is that book written in English? (Maybe that's part of your issue.)

If you and I have exactly $1 in our pocket, and somebody else says to you, "I have exactly $1 in my pocket, just like you", then why think the $1 in my pocket would suddenly change. Magic?

;)
I'm totally with you, but in the second part who said that it didn't change?! that's my problem. if I didn't touch your pocket, then is it definitely still the same?!
 
Is that book written in English? (Maybe that's part of your issue.)

If you and I have exactly $1 in our pocket, and somebody else says to you, "I have exactly $1 in my pocket, just like you", then why think the $1 in my pocket would suddenly change. Magic?

;)
I'm not saying magic, because there's no magic in math. what I'm thinking that none tells that you didn't change what's in your pocket after a while (after we read and finish the second part of your sentence..maybe the first case(your pocket) would be changed ! because a time have passed since we have read your first statement), so how I know that's still $1 in your pocket?!!
 
I'm not saying magic, because there's no magic in math. what I'm thinking that none tells that you didn't change what's in your pocket after a while (after we read and finish the second part of your sentence..maybe the first case(your pocket) would be changed ! because a time have passed since we have read your first statement), so how I know that's still $1 in your pocket?!!
Ryan, if I was a moderator, I'd "close" such ridiculous threads....
 
Ryan, if I was a moderator, I'd "close" such ridiculous threads....
Hi sir, but I'm not joking, if you think I'm joking then why I would open like this thread? because I'm really struggling that and sorry if you have iq of inshtient and I'm not, that's my skills and I'm trying to improve them where's the problem?!!!
 
Ryan, if I was a moderator, I'd "close" such ridiculous threads....
and instead of just bothering, it could be more than appreciated and honor to help your OP no more nothing else, yeah it might be a silly question, but I face a problem with it which related to me it's magnificent problem, thanks alot
 
… who said that [given information] didn't change?! that's my problem …
… maybe the [amount of money in your pocket] changed ! because a time have passed since we have read your first statement …
If any of the dollar amounts (in my example) had changed, then you would have been told, already. So, don't worry about given information changing. Just accept the information in exercises as described.

In your exercise, it's given that x=y and y=z, so those relationships are fixed. Nothing about them is going to change, in that exercise.

If you worry that given information might change, then you won't be able to believe anything! An exercise statement will tell you, if anything changes.

In summary: Do not change given information.

?
 
If any of the dollar amounts (in my example) had changed, then you would have been told, already. So, don't worry about given information changing. Just accept the information in exercises as described.

In your exercise, it's given that x=y and y=z, so those relationships are fixed. Nothing about them is going to change, in that exercise.

If you worry that given information might change, then you won't be able to believe anything! An exercise statement will tell you, if anything changes.

In summary: Do not change given information.

?
thanks alot ! convinced me much appreciated!
 
Top