I What Are Examples of Alternate Orderings in Mathematics?

AI Thread Summary
Alternate orderings in mathematics can deviate from the standard sequence of integers (0, 1, 2, 3) and can include arrangements like 0, 2, 1, 3, or even sorting based on properties such as parity. These alternative orderings do not change the arithmetic properties of the numbers, meaning operations like addition remain consistent regardless of the order. Examples include sorting all even numbers before odd ones or establishing a bijection with rational numbers to create a new sequence. Some orderings may not have a "first integer," indicating they are not well-ordered, while others can be classified as partial orders where not all elements are comparable. Understanding these concepts can deepen insights into mathematical structures and their flexibility.
gmax137
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Messages
3,134
Reaction score
3,623
In another thread
fresh_42 said:
I don't have a specific example in mind, but there could be a solution in domains other than the integers and with an ordering other than our normal ordering. It all depends on which meanings you attach to the symbols you use.
This has me curious about "ordering other than our normal ordering." What does this mean? I take it that "normal ordering (of integers)" is ... 0, 1, 2, 3... Do mathematicians consider alternate orderings like ...0, 2, 1, 3... That doesnt seem to make sense to me, that's more like changing the names. Or is it like complex numbers, where it isn't really clear what Z1 > Z2 means.

I think I'm looking for pointers to where "alternate orderings" would be described / discussed.

Thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Other than normal has to be user defined!
 
gmax137 said:
In another thread

This has me curious about "ordering other than our normal ordering." What does this mean? I take it that "normal ordering (of integers)" is ... 0, 1, 2, 3... Do mathematicians consider alternate orderings like ...0, 2, 1, 3...
Yes. Mathematicians consider orderings like that. Look at this article about total orders.

Thinking about a different order for the integers does not affect their arithmetic properties. You still have 2 + 2 = 4 even though 4 may not be the number after the number after 2 in the new ordering.

For instance, you could sort all of the even numbers up front and put all of the odd numbers behind.

Or you could put 42 up front and leave all of the other numbers in the standard order behind.

Or you could set up a bijection (a one to one mapping) between the integers and the rational numbers and sort the integers in order by their counterpart rational number according to the chosen bijection.

The resulting ordering might not have a "first integer". That would mean that it is not a "well ordering".

You might weaken the order so that you do not require that all integers be comparable at all. That sort of thing would be a "partial order"
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top