Re: Notation wanted for { 0, 1, ..., n }
From: D. J. Bernstein (djb_at_cr.yp.to)
Date: 08/13/03
- Next message: mareg_at_mimosa.csv.warwick.ac.uk: "Re: Notation wanted for { 0, 1, ..., n }"
- Previous message: Virgil: "Re: Notation wanted for { 0, 1, ..., n }"
- In reply to: Mark Wooding: "Notation wanted for { 0, 1, ..., n }"
- Next in thread: Mark Wooding: "Re: Notation wanted for { 0, 1, ..., n - 1 } (was `..., n')"
- Reply: Mark Wooding: "Re: Notation wanted for { 0, 1, ..., n - 1 } (was `..., n')"
- Reply: Aatu Koskensilta: "Re: Notation wanted for { 0, 1, ..., n }"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 21:35:40 +0000 (UTC)
Mark Wooding wrote:
> Does anyone know of a decent, /terse/ notation for the set of natural
> numbers { i in N | i < n }, i.e., { 0, 1, ..., n - 1 }?
The shortest possibility is to simply write n. The notation X^n for the
set of functions from n to X is consistent with the notation X^n for the
set of length-n sequences from X, if you number vectors starting from 0.
In many set theories, this is part of the definition of natural numbers:
each natural number n is equal to the set of smaller natural numbers.
This idea is universally credited to von Neumann; does anyone know where
it was first published?
---D. J. Bernstein, Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics,
Statistics, and Computer Science, University of Illinois at Chicago
- Next message: mareg_at_mimosa.csv.warwick.ac.uk: "Re: Notation wanted for { 0, 1, ..., n }"
- Previous message: Virgil: "Re: Notation wanted for { 0, 1, ..., n }"
- In reply to: Mark Wooding: "Notation wanted for { 0, 1, ..., n }"
- Next in thread: Mark Wooding: "Re: Notation wanted for { 0, 1, ..., n - 1 } (was `..., n')"
- Reply: Mark Wooding: "Re: Notation wanted for { 0, 1, ..., n - 1 } (was `..., n')"
- Reply: Aatu Koskensilta: "Re: Notation wanted for { 0, 1, ..., n }"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
