What is the proper (handwritten) notation for the complex conjugate of a vector?
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
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 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,229827
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
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 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,229827
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 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 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 at 12:55
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
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 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,229827
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 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,229827
asked Nov 21 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,229827
asked Nov 21 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,229827
asked Nov 21 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,229827
asked Nov 21 at 3:26
Skeleton Bow
1,229827
1,229827
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 at 12:55
add a comment |
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
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 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 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 at 12:55