Mixing
What is the proper (handwritten) notation for the complex conjugate of a vector?
Let us say that we have a vector $vec{v} = langle 1 + i, i rangle$. As far as I am aware, using the arrow above the vector as done above is how vectors are generally denoted in writing and also in LaTeX (as it corresponds to the vec command). Textbooks, however, often use a bolded letter, e.g. $mathbf{v}$, to denote vectors.
Let's say that I want to denote the complex conjugate of the vector above. To denote the complex conjugate of an expression, I've seen bars normally being used, e.g. $bar{z}$ or $overline{a + bi}$.
How would I write the complex conjugate of vector $vec{v}$? In handwriting, I feel like I should simply put a bar over the vector, like $overline{vec{v}}$, but this does not looks very nice and seems to hinder communication. I assume I could also write $overline{langle 1 + i, i rangle}$, but I'm looking for a way to denote the conjugate of the vector letter itself. Textbooks I understand probably can get away with writing $bar{mathbf{v}}$.
So what is the "proper" way to denote the complex conjugate of some vector in handwriting?
notation
asked Nov 21 '18 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,234827
add a comment |
Let us say that we have a vector $vec{v} = langle 1 + i, i rangle$. As far as I am aware, using the arrow above the vector as done above is how vectors are generally denoted in writing and also in LaTeX (as it corresponds to the vec command). Textbooks, however, often use a bolded letter, e.g. $mathbf{v}$, to denote vectors.
Let's say that I want to denote the complex conjugate of the vector above. To denote the complex conjugate of an expression, I've seen bars normally being used, e.g. $bar{z}$ or $overline{a + bi}$.
How would I write the complex conjugate of vector $vec{v}$? In handwriting, I feel like I should simply put a bar over the vector, like $overline{vec{v}}$, but this does not looks very nice and seems to hinder communication. I assume I could also write $overline{langle 1 + i, i rangle}$, but I'm looking for a way to denote the conjugate of the vector letter itself. Textbooks I understand probably can get away with writing $bar{mathbf{v}}$.
So what is the "proper" way to denote the complex conjugate of some vector in handwriting?
notation
asked Nov 21 '18 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,234827
2
Most math authors don't put arrows over vectors. So then if $x$ is a vector in $mathbb C^n$, you could use the notation $bar x$ for the componentwise complex conjugate of $x$.
– littleO
Nov 21 '18 at 3:36
@littleO I think that's about as close to an answer as OP can expect. Perhaps promote your comment to a full answer?
– Travis
Nov 21 '18 at 6:18
1
If you always write arrows over your vectors and conjugating a vector is not a surprise (because it’s mentioned in the surrounding text or a natural thing to do in the specific situation), I don’t think the arrow plus overbar will be confusing. I would make sure that the overbar is longer than the arrow (to “cover” it) but then you’re fine. (It still doesn’t look nice, though.)
– Eike Schulte
Nov 21 '18 at 12:55
add a comment |
Let us say that we have a vector $vec{v} = langle 1 + i, i rangle$. As far as I am aware, using the arrow above the vector as done above is how vectors are generally denoted in writing and also in LaTeX (as it corresponds to the vec command). Textbooks, however, often use a bolded letter, e.g. $mathbf{v}$, to denote vectors.
Let's say that I want to denote the complex conjugate of the vector above. To denote the complex conjugate of an expression, I've seen bars normally being used, e.g. $bar{z}$ or $overline{a + bi}$.
How would I write the complex conjugate of vector $vec{v}$? In handwriting, I feel like I should simply put a bar over the vector, like $overline{vec{v}}$, but this does not looks very nice and seems to hinder communication. I assume I could also write $overline{langle 1 + i, i rangle}$, but I'm looking for a way to denote the conjugate of the vector letter itself. Textbooks I understand probably can get away with writing $bar{mathbf{v}}$.
So what is the "proper" way to denote the complex conjugate of some vector in handwriting?
notation
asked Nov 21 '18 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,234827
Let us say that we have a vector $vec{v} = langle 1 + i, i rangle$. As far as I am aware, using the arrow above the vector as done above is how vectors are generally denoted in writing and also in LaTeX (as it corresponds to the vec command). Textbooks, however, often use a bolded letter, e.g. $mathbf{v}$, to denote vectors.
Let's say that I want to denote the complex conjugate of the vector above. To denote the complex conjugate of an expression, I've seen bars normally being used, e.g. $bar{z}$ or $overline{a + bi}$.
How would I write the complex conjugate of vector $vec{v}$? In handwriting, I feel like I should simply put a bar over the vector, like $overline{vec{v}}$, but this does not looks very nice and seems to hinder communication. I assume I could also write $overline{langle 1 + i, i rangle}$, but I'm looking for a way to denote the conjugate of the vector letter itself. Textbooks I understand probably can get away with writing $bar{mathbf{v}}$.
So what is the "proper" way to denote the complex conjugate of some vector in handwriting?
notation
notation
asked Nov 21 '18 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,234827
asked Nov 21 '18 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,234827
asked Nov 21 '18 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,234827
asked Nov 21 '18 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,234827
asked Nov 21 '18 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,234827
1,234827
2
Most math authors don't put arrows over vectors. So then if $x$ is a vector in $mathbb C^n$, you could use the notation $bar x$ for the componentwise complex conjugate of $x$.
– littleO
Nov 21 '18 at 3:36
@littleO I think that's about as close to an answer as OP can expect. Perhaps promote your comment to a full answer?
– Travis
Nov 21 '18 at 6:18
1
If you always write arrows over your vectors and conjugating a vector is not a surprise (because it’s mentioned in the surrounding text or a natural thing to do in the specific situation), I don’t think the arrow plus overbar will be confusing. I would make sure that the overbar is longer than the arrow (to “cover” it) but then you’re fine. (It still doesn’t look nice, though.)
– Eike Schulte
Nov 21 '18 at 12:55
add a comment |
2
Most math authors don't put arrows over vectors. So then if $x$ is a vector in $mathbb C^n$, you could use the notation $bar x$ for the componentwise complex conjugate of $x$.
– littleO
Nov 21 '18 at 3:36
@littleO I think that's about as close to an answer as OP can expect. Perhaps promote your comment to a full answer?
– Travis
Nov 21 '18 at 6:18
1
If you always write arrows over your vectors and conjugating a vector is not a surprise (because it’s mentioned in the surrounding text or a natural thing to do in the specific situation), I don’t think the arrow plus overbar will be confusing. I would make sure that the overbar is longer than the arrow (to “cover” it) but then you’re fine. (It still doesn’t look nice, though.)
– Eike Schulte
Nov 21 '18 at 12:55
2
2
Most math authors don't put arrows over vectors. So then if $x$ is a vector in $mathbb C^n$, you could use the notation $bar x$ for the componentwise complex conjugate of $x$.
– littleO
Nov 21 '18 at 3:36
Most math authors don't put arrows over vectors. So then if $x$ is a vector in $mathbb C^n$, you could use the notation $bar x$ for the componentwise complex conjugate of $x$.
– littleO
Nov 21 '18 at 3:36
@littleO I think that's about as close to an answer as OP can expect. Perhaps promote your comment to a full answer?
– Travis
Nov 21 '18 at 6:18
@littleO I think that's about as close to an answer as OP can expect. Perhaps promote your comment to a full answer?
– Travis
Nov 21 '18 at 6:18
1
1
If you always write arrows over your vectors and conjugating a vector is not a surprise (because it’s mentioned in the surrounding text or a natural thing to do in the specific situation), I don’t think the arrow plus overbar will be confusing. I would make sure that the overbar is longer than the arrow (to “cover” it) but then you’re fine. (It still doesn’t look nice, though.)
– Eike Schulte
Nov 21 '18 at 12:55
If you always write arrows over your vectors and conjugating a vector is not a surprise (because it’s mentioned in the surrounding text or a natural thing to do in the specific situation), I don’t think the arrow plus overbar will be confusing. I would make sure that the overbar is longer than the arrow (to “cover” it) but then you’re fine. (It still doesn’t look nice, though.)
– Eike Schulte
Nov 21 '18 at 12:55
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
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',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3007218%2fwhat-is-the-proper-handwritten-notation-for-the-complex-conjugate-of-a-vector%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3007218%2fwhat-is-the-proper-handwritten-notation-for-the-complex-conjugate-of-a-vector%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
2
Most math authors don't put arrows over vectors. So then if $x$ is a vector in $mathbb C^n$, you could use the notation $bar x$ for the componentwise complex conjugate of $x$.
– littleO
Nov 21 '18 at 3:36
@littleO I think that's about as close to an answer as OP can expect. Perhaps promote your comment to a full answer?
– Travis
Nov 21 '18 at 6:18
1
If you always write arrows over your vectors and conjugating a vector is not a surprise (because it’s mentioned in the surrounding text or a natural thing to do in the specific situation), I don’t think the arrow plus overbar will be confusing. I would make sure that the overbar is longer than the arrow (to “cover” it) but then you’re fine. (It still doesn’t look nice, though.)
– Eike Schulte
Nov 21 '18 at 12:55