Home > math, notation, statistics, writing > Is Not Necessarily Equal To

Is Not Necessarily Equal To

October 4th, 2007 Leave a comment Go to comments

At lunch at Nuffield I was just asking MM about some math notation I’d like: a symbol for “is not necessarily equal to”. For example, and economics paper might show the following:

Proposition: Stocks with equal risks might or might not have the same returns. In the model’s notation, x IS NOT NECESSARILY EQUAL TO y.

Click here to read more

Categories: math, notation, statistics, writing Tags:
  1. Anonymous
    October 9th, 2007 at 02:43 | #1


  2. Anonymous
    October 8th, 2007 at 23:34 | #2

    ztipypBUT (wrt 7/10) modal operators traditionally take propositions as their arguments; they are not relation-modifiers. This surely fits more closely with the original query? The original concern is with the status of an ‘a=b’ claim, not the thought that ‘a’ and ‘b’ are in some new, undefined, relation??
    Further a new ‘a ? b’ relation remains undefined until we specify its entailments. [Propositional modal logic does provide a structure of entailments – – and plenty of (possibly relevant) fretting about the consistency of meaning of ‘necessary’ ]

  3. Anonymous
    October 5th, 2007 at 07:55 | #3

    You could use in conjunction standard modal logic operators (square for ‘it is necessarily the case that’, diamond for ‘it is possibly the case that’)?


  4. ridlon
    October 4th, 2007 at 08:57 | #4

    Couldn’t you just stack <>=? This is available in Sci Workplace.

  1. No trackbacks yet.