# Mathematics and notation

Despite mathematicians’ apparent focus on notation, I’ve always found it difficult to navigate certain notation in math. In fact, although I am only up to the level of undergraduate mathematics in the US, I might say that the chief difficulty so far has been with notation, not some intrinsic difficulty of the subject (for, if mathematics is merely verbal and a sequence of tautologies, then the ability to follow instructions is all that is necessary—until the instructions are obscured by poor notation!).

Part of the problem is that there is a lot in notation that is
*implicit*. When talking about mathematics in person, there is no
need to specify all the context, because if anything is unclear, one can
just ask and it will be clarified verbally.

I like what James Morrow (my math 334 instructor) said when discussing the multivariable chain rule:

Writing it down this way is okay, but you have to understand what the symbols mean […] It’s an efficient way to write it down […] I think you’ll get used to it […] The exercises [in the book] are meant to show you that it’s easy to mess it up […] Chemists don’t tell you which variable they’re keeping constant […] There’s a lot that’s implicit and it’s hard to tell what’s going on.

I also like AbstractMath.org.

Another example with partial derivatives (inspired by an ambiguity
that Terence Tao touched on in his *Analysis II*): define as and as . Observe that we have
. Trick
question: what is ?

If we mean to take , then this is On the other hand, if we mean , then this is

Folland gives other examples of when the partial derivative notation doesn’t make any sense (it can mean two different things).