Is use of arrows between equations recommended











up vote
4
down vote

favorite












In high school, I was told that I always should use arrows to indicate rearrangements of equations, such as:



begin{eqnarray}
aleft[b+frac{c}{d}right]&=&a\
&Updownarrow&\
1-frac{c}{d}&=&b
end{eqnarray}



upon starting my bachelor in physics, some of my co-students have suggested that this is, in fact, if not outright an error, at least not good mathematical notation, and the former example ought to be written:



begin{eqnarray}
aleft[b+frac{c}{d}right]&=&a\
1-frac{c}{d}&=&b
end{eqnarray}



Edit: arguing that they are not necessary, and thus a waste of symbols and possibly a source of distraction.



While others again have suggested that it is correct, but only if the arrows are one-way arrows:



begin{eqnarray}
aleft[b+frac{c}{d}right]&=&a\
&Downarrow&\
1-frac{c}{d}&=&b
end{eqnarray}



Edit: arguing that one shouldn't give the impression that for instance $F=m a$ can be proven from one the result of the results in one particular theoretical exercise in classical mechanic.



I, therefore, wish to know if any official guidelines exist for arrows between equations, and if they are optional, whether or not they are recommended and which types of arrows (one-way or two way) are recommended.










share|cite|improve this question




























    up vote
    4
    down vote

    favorite












    In high school, I was told that I always should use arrows to indicate rearrangements of equations, such as:



    begin{eqnarray}
    aleft[b+frac{c}{d}right]&=&a\
    &Updownarrow&\
    1-frac{c}{d}&=&b
    end{eqnarray}



    upon starting my bachelor in physics, some of my co-students have suggested that this is, in fact, if not outright an error, at least not good mathematical notation, and the former example ought to be written:



    begin{eqnarray}
    aleft[b+frac{c}{d}right]&=&a\
    1-frac{c}{d}&=&b
    end{eqnarray}



    Edit: arguing that they are not necessary, and thus a waste of symbols and possibly a source of distraction.



    While others again have suggested that it is correct, but only if the arrows are one-way arrows:



    begin{eqnarray}
    aleft[b+frac{c}{d}right]&=&a\
    &Downarrow&\
    1-frac{c}{d}&=&b
    end{eqnarray}



    Edit: arguing that one shouldn't give the impression that for instance $F=m a$ can be proven from one the result of the results in one particular theoretical exercise in classical mechanic.



    I, therefore, wish to know if any official guidelines exist for arrows between equations, and if they are optional, whether or not they are recommended and which types of arrows (one-way or two way) are recommended.










    share|cite|improve this question


























      up vote
      4
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      4
      down vote

      favorite











      In high school, I was told that I always should use arrows to indicate rearrangements of equations, such as:



      begin{eqnarray}
      aleft[b+frac{c}{d}right]&=&a\
      &Updownarrow&\
      1-frac{c}{d}&=&b
      end{eqnarray}



      upon starting my bachelor in physics, some of my co-students have suggested that this is, in fact, if not outright an error, at least not good mathematical notation, and the former example ought to be written:



      begin{eqnarray}
      aleft[b+frac{c}{d}right]&=&a\
      1-frac{c}{d}&=&b
      end{eqnarray}



      Edit: arguing that they are not necessary, and thus a waste of symbols and possibly a source of distraction.



      While others again have suggested that it is correct, but only if the arrows are one-way arrows:



      begin{eqnarray}
      aleft[b+frac{c}{d}right]&=&a\
      &Downarrow&\
      1-frac{c}{d}&=&b
      end{eqnarray}



      Edit: arguing that one shouldn't give the impression that for instance $F=m a$ can be proven from one the result of the results in one particular theoretical exercise in classical mechanic.



      I, therefore, wish to know if any official guidelines exist for arrows between equations, and if they are optional, whether or not they are recommended and which types of arrows (one-way or two way) are recommended.










      share|cite|improve this question















      In high school, I was told that I always should use arrows to indicate rearrangements of equations, such as:



      begin{eqnarray}
      aleft[b+frac{c}{d}right]&=&a\
      &Updownarrow&\
      1-frac{c}{d}&=&b
      end{eqnarray}



      upon starting my bachelor in physics, some of my co-students have suggested that this is, in fact, if not outright an error, at least not good mathematical notation, and the former example ought to be written:



      begin{eqnarray}
      aleft[b+frac{c}{d}right]&=&a\
      1-frac{c}{d}&=&b
      end{eqnarray}



      Edit: arguing that they are not necessary, and thus a waste of symbols and possibly a source of distraction.



      While others again have suggested that it is correct, but only if the arrows are one-way arrows:



      begin{eqnarray}
      aleft[b+frac{c}{d}right]&=&a\
      &Downarrow&\
      1-frac{c}{d}&=&b
      end{eqnarray}



      Edit: arguing that one shouldn't give the impression that for instance $F=m a$ can be proven from one the result of the results in one particular theoretical exercise in classical mechanic.



      I, therefore, wish to know if any official guidelines exist for arrows between equations, and if they are optional, whether or not they are recommended and which types of arrows (one-way or two way) are recommended.







      notation convention






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Nov 27 at 19:09

























      asked Nov 27 at 17:54









      Nikolaj

      1355




      1355






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted










          Arrows indicate the flow of logic, meaning that the equation at the tail of the arrow implies the equation at the head of the arrow. If you use a double-headed arrow, it means that each equation implies the other.



          For example, the following uses of $Rightarrow$ and $Leftrightarrow$ are fine:
          $$x = 1 ~ Rightarrow ~ x^2 = 1 qquad text{and} qquad 2x+1 = 5 ~ Leftrightarrow ~ x=2$$
          but the following uses of $Rightarrow$ and $Leftrightarrow$ are not fine
          $$x = 1 ~ Leftrightarrow ~ x^2 = 1 qquad text{and} qquad sin(x) = 0 ~ Rightarrow ~ x=0$$
          The first fails because $x^2=1$ implies $x=1$ or $x=-1$, not necessarily that $x=1$; the second fails because $sin(x)=0$ implies that $x=npi$ for some $n in mathbb{Z}$. The issue in both of these cases is that the operation we performed (squaring and applying the $sin$ function, respectively) was not invertible.



          So to answer your question about whether you should use arrows, my advice comes in two parts:





          • Yes, use arrows! They help to explain your flow of logic, meaning that you're communicating your mathematical ideas more effectively. But...

          • ...be careful! If you're rearranging equations then usually the $Rightarrow$ direction is what you're doing; if you want to be able to reverse it (i.e. turn the $Rightarrow$ into a $Leftrightarrow$) then you need to make sure that the operation you when turning one equation into the next is an invertible operation.


          I don't know anyone in their right mind who thinks that writing a sequence of equations with no indication of logical flow is better than writing a sequence of equations with an indication of logical flow.



          P.S. You ask in your question about official guidelines, so I should clarify that there are none, but there are certain practices (e.g. indicating logical flow) that are evidently better than others (e.g. not indicating logical flow, or erroneously indicating incorrect logical flow).






          share|cite|improve this answer





















            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3016088%2fis-use-of-arrows-between-equations-recommended%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            4
            down vote



            accepted










            Arrows indicate the flow of logic, meaning that the equation at the tail of the arrow implies the equation at the head of the arrow. If you use a double-headed arrow, it means that each equation implies the other.



            For example, the following uses of $Rightarrow$ and $Leftrightarrow$ are fine:
            $$x = 1 ~ Rightarrow ~ x^2 = 1 qquad text{and} qquad 2x+1 = 5 ~ Leftrightarrow ~ x=2$$
            but the following uses of $Rightarrow$ and $Leftrightarrow$ are not fine
            $$x = 1 ~ Leftrightarrow ~ x^2 = 1 qquad text{and} qquad sin(x) = 0 ~ Rightarrow ~ x=0$$
            The first fails because $x^2=1$ implies $x=1$ or $x=-1$, not necessarily that $x=1$; the second fails because $sin(x)=0$ implies that $x=npi$ for some $n in mathbb{Z}$. The issue in both of these cases is that the operation we performed (squaring and applying the $sin$ function, respectively) was not invertible.



            So to answer your question about whether you should use arrows, my advice comes in two parts:





            • Yes, use arrows! They help to explain your flow of logic, meaning that you're communicating your mathematical ideas more effectively. But...

            • ...be careful! If you're rearranging equations then usually the $Rightarrow$ direction is what you're doing; if you want to be able to reverse it (i.e. turn the $Rightarrow$ into a $Leftrightarrow$) then you need to make sure that the operation you when turning one equation into the next is an invertible operation.


            I don't know anyone in their right mind who thinks that writing a sequence of equations with no indication of logical flow is better than writing a sequence of equations with an indication of logical flow.



            P.S. You ask in your question about official guidelines, so I should clarify that there are none, but there are certain practices (e.g. indicating logical flow) that are evidently better than others (e.g. not indicating logical flow, or erroneously indicating incorrect logical flow).






            share|cite|improve this answer

























              up vote
              4
              down vote



              accepted










              Arrows indicate the flow of logic, meaning that the equation at the tail of the arrow implies the equation at the head of the arrow. If you use a double-headed arrow, it means that each equation implies the other.



              For example, the following uses of $Rightarrow$ and $Leftrightarrow$ are fine:
              $$x = 1 ~ Rightarrow ~ x^2 = 1 qquad text{and} qquad 2x+1 = 5 ~ Leftrightarrow ~ x=2$$
              but the following uses of $Rightarrow$ and $Leftrightarrow$ are not fine
              $$x = 1 ~ Leftrightarrow ~ x^2 = 1 qquad text{and} qquad sin(x) = 0 ~ Rightarrow ~ x=0$$
              The first fails because $x^2=1$ implies $x=1$ or $x=-1$, not necessarily that $x=1$; the second fails because $sin(x)=0$ implies that $x=npi$ for some $n in mathbb{Z}$. The issue in both of these cases is that the operation we performed (squaring and applying the $sin$ function, respectively) was not invertible.



              So to answer your question about whether you should use arrows, my advice comes in two parts:





              • Yes, use arrows! They help to explain your flow of logic, meaning that you're communicating your mathematical ideas more effectively. But...

              • ...be careful! If you're rearranging equations then usually the $Rightarrow$ direction is what you're doing; if you want to be able to reverse it (i.e. turn the $Rightarrow$ into a $Leftrightarrow$) then you need to make sure that the operation you when turning one equation into the next is an invertible operation.


              I don't know anyone in their right mind who thinks that writing a sequence of equations with no indication of logical flow is better than writing a sequence of equations with an indication of logical flow.



              P.S. You ask in your question about official guidelines, so I should clarify that there are none, but there are certain practices (e.g. indicating logical flow) that are evidently better than others (e.g. not indicating logical flow, or erroneously indicating incorrect logical flow).






              share|cite|improve this answer























                up vote
                4
                down vote



                accepted







                up vote
                4
                down vote



                accepted






                Arrows indicate the flow of logic, meaning that the equation at the tail of the arrow implies the equation at the head of the arrow. If you use a double-headed arrow, it means that each equation implies the other.



                For example, the following uses of $Rightarrow$ and $Leftrightarrow$ are fine:
                $$x = 1 ~ Rightarrow ~ x^2 = 1 qquad text{and} qquad 2x+1 = 5 ~ Leftrightarrow ~ x=2$$
                but the following uses of $Rightarrow$ and $Leftrightarrow$ are not fine
                $$x = 1 ~ Leftrightarrow ~ x^2 = 1 qquad text{and} qquad sin(x) = 0 ~ Rightarrow ~ x=0$$
                The first fails because $x^2=1$ implies $x=1$ or $x=-1$, not necessarily that $x=1$; the second fails because $sin(x)=0$ implies that $x=npi$ for some $n in mathbb{Z}$. The issue in both of these cases is that the operation we performed (squaring and applying the $sin$ function, respectively) was not invertible.



                So to answer your question about whether you should use arrows, my advice comes in two parts:





                • Yes, use arrows! They help to explain your flow of logic, meaning that you're communicating your mathematical ideas more effectively. But...

                • ...be careful! If you're rearranging equations then usually the $Rightarrow$ direction is what you're doing; if you want to be able to reverse it (i.e. turn the $Rightarrow$ into a $Leftrightarrow$) then you need to make sure that the operation you when turning one equation into the next is an invertible operation.


                I don't know anyone in their right mind who thinks that writing a sequence of equations with no indication of logical flow is better than writing a sequence of equations with an indication of logical flow.



                P.S. You ask in your question about official guidelines, so I should clarify that there are none, but there are certain practices (e.g. indicating logical flow) that are evidently better than others (e.g. not indicating logical flow, or erroneously indicating incorrect logical flow).






                share|cite|improve this answer












                Arrows indicate the flow of logic, meaning that the equation at the tail of the arrow implies the equation at the head of the arrow. If you use a double-headed arrow, it means that each equation implies the other.



                For example, the following uses of $Rightarrow$ and $Leftrightarrow$ are fine:
                $$x = 1 ~ Rightarrow ~ x^2 = 1 qquad text{and} qquad 2x+1 = 5 ~ Leftrightarrow ~ x=2$$
                but the following uses of $Rightarrow$ and $Leftrightarrow$ are not fine
                $$x = 1 ~ Leftrightarrow ~ x^2 = 1 qquad text{and} qquad sin(x) = 0 ~ Rightarrow ~ x=0$$
                The first fails because $x^2=1$ implies $x=1$ or $x=-1$, not necessarily that $x=1$; the second fails because $sin(x)=0$ implies that $x=npi$ for some $n in mathbb{Z}$. The issue in both of these cases is that the operation we performed (squaring and applying the $sin$ function, respectively) was not invertible.



                So to answer your question about whether you should use arrows, my advice comes in two parts:





                • Yes, use arrows! They help to explain your flow of logic, meaning that you're communicating your mathematical ideas more effectively. But...

                • ...be careful! If you're rearranging equations then usually the $Rightarrow$ direction is what you're doing; if you want to be able to reverse it (i.e. turn the $Rightarrow$ into a $Leftrightarrow$) then you need to make sure that the operation you when turning one equation into the next is an invertible operation.


                I don't know anyone in their right mind who thinks that writing a sequence of equations with no indication of logical flow is better than writing a sequence of equations with an indication of logical flow.



                P.S. You ask in your question about official guidelines, so I should clarify that there are none, but there are certain practices (e.g. indicating logical flow) that are evidently better than others (e.g. not indicating logical flow, or erroneously indicating incorrect logical flow).







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Nov 27 at 18:02









                Clive Newstead

                49.8k473132




                49.8k473132






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                    Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                    Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3016088%2fis-use-of-arrows-between-equations-recommended%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Berounka

                    Different font size/position of beamer's navigation symbols template's content depending on regular/plain...

                    Sphinx de Gizeh