The History of Mathematical Symbols

The factorial symbol n!

The symbol n!, called factorial n, was introduced in 1808 by Christian Kramp of Strassbourg, who chose it so as to circumvent printing difficulties incurred the previously used symbol thus illustrated on the right. (Eves p132) The symbol n! for "factorial n", now universally used in algebra, is due to Christian Kramp (1760-1826) of Strassburg, who used it in 1808. (Cajori p341) by

The symbols for similar and congruent

Our familiar signs, in geometry, for similar (on the left), and for congruent (on the right) are due to Leibniz (1646-1715.) (Eves p253) Leibniz made important contributions to the notation of mathematics. In Leibnizian manuscripts occurs this symbol (on the left) for similar, and this symbol (on the right) for equal and similar or congruent. (Cajori p211)

The symbol for angle and right angle

In 1923, the National Committee on Mathematical Requirements, sponsored by the Mathematical Association of America, recommended this symbol (on the left) as standard usage for angle in the United States. Historically, Pierre Herigone, in a French work in 1634, was apparently the first person to use a symbol for angle. He used both the symbol above as well as this symbol on the right, which had already been used to mean "less than." The standard symbol survived, along with other variants, as follows. These appeared in England circa 1750.

During the 19th century in Europe these forms were used to designate the angle ABC, and the angle between a and b , respectively. This symbol, representing the arc on the angle, first appeared in Germany in the latter half of the 19th century.

The symbol for right angle

This symbol (on the left) for right angle was used as early as 1698 by Samuel Reyher, who symbolized "angle B is a right angle" as illustrated on the right, using the vertical line for equality.

This commonly used symbol for right angle appeared in America around 1880 in the widely used Wentworth geometry textbook. (NCTM p362,364

The symbol for pi

This symbol for pi was used by the early English mathematicians William Oughtred (1574 -1660), Isaac Barrow (1630-1677), and David Gregory (1661-1701) to designate the circumference , or periphery, of a circle. The first to use the symbol for the ratio of the circumference to the diameter was the English writer, William Jones, in a publication in 1706. The symbol was not generally used in this sense, however, until Euler (1707-1783) adopted it in 1737. (Eves p99) Oughtred's notation was the forerunner of the relation pi = 3.14159..., first used by William Jones in 1706 in his Synopsis palmariorum matheseos. Euler first used pi = 3.14159... in 1737. In his time, the symbol met with general adoption. (Cajori p158) This symbol for pi was used by Oughtred in an expression to represent the ratio of the diameter to the circumference. Isaac Barrow, from 1664, used the same symbolism. David Gregory used pi in an expression to represent the ratio of the circumference to the radius in 1697. The first to use pi definitely to stand for the ratio of circumference to diameter was an English writer William Jones. He used it to symbolize the word "periphery." Euler adopted the symbol in 1737, and since that time it has been in general use. (Smith p312) The number pi is the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter. It is also the ratio of the area of a circle to the area of the square on its radius. The adoption of the symbol for pi for this ratio is essentially due to the usage given it by Leonhard Euler from 1736 on. In the 1730's, Euler first used p and c for the circumference -to-diameter ratio, then adopted this symbol for pi. However, he is not the originator of the symbol. An actual ratio symbol as illustrated here on the right had been used by William Oughtred in 1647 and by Isaac Barrow in 1664 to indicate the ratio of the diameter of a circle to it's circumference or periphery.

David Gregory, nephew of Scottish mathematician James Gregory (1638-1675), used this symbol on the left for the ratio of circumference to radius in 1697. In 1706 the English writer William Jones, in a work that gave the 100-place approximation of John Machin, first used the single symbol for pi. This computation of pi to a large number of places by means of various series representations was aided by the use of such relations as pi/4 = 4 arctan (1/5) arctan (1/239), as given by Machin in 1706. (NCTM p148,152)

The symbol for percent

Percent has been used since the end of the fifteenth century in business problems such as computing interest, profit and loss, and taxes. However, the idea had its origin much

earlier. When the Roman emperor Augustus levied a tax on all goods sold at auction, centesima rerum venalium, the rate was 1/100. Other Roman taxes were 1/20 on every freed slave and 1/25 on every slave sold. Without recognising percentages as such, they used fractions easily reduced to hundredths. In the Middle Ages, as large denominations of money came to be used, 100 became a common base for computation. Italian manuscripts of the fifteenth century contained such expressions as "20 p 100" and "x p cento" to indicate 20 percent and 10 percent. When commercial arithmetics appeared near the end of that century, use of percent was well estasblished. For example, Giorgio Chiarino (1481) used "xx. per .c." for 20 percent and "viii in x perceto" for 8 to 10 percent. During the sixteenth and seventeenth century, percent was used freely for computing profit and loss and interest. (NCTM p146,147} In its primitive form the per cent sign is found in the 15th century manuscripts on commercial arithmetic, where it appears as this symbol after the word "per" or after the letter "p" as a contraction for "per cento." The use of the per cent symbol can be seen in this extract from an anonymous Italian manuscript of 1684 (Smith p250) The percent sign, %, has probably evolved from a symbol introduced in an anonymous Italian manuscript of 1425. Instead of "per 100," "P cento," which were common at that time, this author used the symbol shown. By about 1650, part of this symbol had been changed to the form shown on the right. Finally, the "per" was dropped, leaving this symbol to stand alone, and this in turn became %. (NCTM p147) The solidus form (%) is modern. (Smith p250) This symbol stands for "per thousand". (Hogben p92)

It is natural to expect that percentage will develop into per millage, and indeed this has not only begun, but it has historic sanction. Bonds are quoted in New York using this symbol on the right, and so in other commercial lines. At present, indeed, the symbol above (Hogben) is used in certain parts of the world, notably by German merchants, to mean "per mill," a curious analogue to % developed without regard to the historic meaning of the latter symbol.(Smith p250)

The symbol for division

The Anglo-American symbol for division is of 17th century origin, and has long been used on the continent of Europe to indicate subtraction. Like most elementary combinations of lines and points, the symbol is old. It was used as early as the 10th century for

the word est. When written after the letter "i", it symbolized "id est." When written after the word "it", it symbolized "interest." If written after the word "divisa", for "divisa est", this might possibly have suggested its use as a symbol of division. Towards the close of the 15th century the Lombard merchants used it to indicate a half, along with similar expressions such as this one on the right. There is also a possibility that it was used by some Italian algebrists to indicate division. In a manuscript entitled Arithmetica and Practtica by Giacomo Filippo Biodi dal Aucisco, copied in 1684, this symbol stands for division, suggesting that various forms of this kind were probably used. The Anglo-American symbol (above top) first appeared in print in the Teutsche Algebra by Johann Heinrich Rahn (1622-1676) which appeared in Zurich in 1659. This symbol was then made known in England by the translation of Rahn's work by Dr. John Pell in London in 1688. (Smith p406) Around the year 1200, both the Arabic writer al-Hassar, and Fibonacci (Leonardo of Pisa), symbolised division in fraction form with the use of a horizontal bar, but it is thought likely that Fibonacci adopted al-Hassar's introduction of this symbolisation. In his Arithmetica integra (1544) Michael Stifel employed the arrangement 8)24 to mean 24 divided by 8. (NCTM p139) Michael Stifel (1486?-1567) was regarded as the greatest German algebrist of the 16th century. (Cajori p140)

The symbol for Inequality

Thomas Harriot (1560-1621) was an English mathematician who lived the longer part of his life in the sixteenth century but whose outstanding publication appeared in the seventeenth century. He is of special interest to Americans, because in 1585 he was sent by Sir Walter Raleigh to the new world to survey and map what was then Virginia but is now North Carolina. As a mathematician Harriot is usually considered the founder of the English school of algebraists. His great work in this field, the Artis Analyticae Praxis was published in London posthumously in 1631, and deals largely with the theory of equations. In it he makes use of these symbols above, ">" for "is greater than" (on the left), and "<" for "is less than" (on the right.) They were not immediately accepted, for many writers preferred these symbols, which another Englishman William Oughtred (1574-1660) had suggested in the same year in the popular Clavis Mathematicae, a work on arithmetic and algebra that did much toward spreading mathematical knowledge in that country.

Isaac Barrow (1630-1677), in a book Lectiones Opticae & Geometricae (London 1674), used these symbols as follows:

this meant "A major est quam B"

and this meant "A minor est quam B." These symbols to the right are modern and are not international. The symbol on the left means "is not equal to." The middle symbol means "is not less than." The symbol on the right stands for "is not greater than." In the 1647 edition of Oughtred's Clavis mathematicae these somewhat analogous symbols appear for "non majus" (on the left) and "non minus" (on the right) respectively. On the Continent these symbols, or some of their variants, apparently invented in 1734 by the French geodesist Pierre Bouguer (1698-1758), are commonly used. Bouguer was one of the French geodesists sent to Peru to measure an arc of a meridian. (Eves p251, Smith p413)

The symbol for infinity

John Wallis (1616-1703) was one of the most original English mathematicians of his day. He was educated for the Church at Cambridge and entered Holy Orders, but his genius was employed chiefly in the study of mathematics. The Arithmetica infinitorum, published in 1655, is his greatest work. (Cajori p183)

This symbol for infinity is first found in print in his 1655 publication Arithmetica Infinitorum. It may have been suggested by the fact that the Romans commonly used this symbol for a thousand, just as today the word myriad is used for any large number, although in the Greek it meant ten thousand. The symbol was used in expressions such as, in 1695, "jam numerus incrementorum est (infinity)." (Smith p413) The symbol for infinity, first chosen by John Wallis in 1655, stands for a concept which has given mathematicians problems since the time of the ancient Greeks. A case in point is that of Zeno of Elea (in southern Italy) who, in the 5th century BC, proposed four paradoxes which addressed whether magnitudes (lengths or numbers) are infinitely divisible or made up of a large number of small indivisible parts. (Brinkworth and Scott p80) Wallis thought of a triangle, base length B, as composed of an infinite number of very thin parallelograms whose areas (from vertex to base of the triangle) form an arithmetic progression with 0 for the first term and ( A /(infinity)). B for the last term - since the last parallelogram (along the base B of the triangle) has altitude (A/(infinity)) and base B.

The area of the triangle is the sum of the arithmetic progression O + . . . . + (A/(infinity)).B = (number of terms/2). (first + last term) =(infinity/2).(0+(A/(infinity)).B) =(infinity/2).(A/(infinity)).B =(A-B)/2 (NCTM p413)

The symbols for ratio and proportion

The symbol : to indicate ratio seems to have originated in England early in the 17th century. It appears in a text entitled Johnsons Arithmetick ; In two Bookes (London.1633), but to indicate a fraction, three quarters being written 3:4. To indicate a ratio it appears in an astronomical work, the Harmonicon Coeleste (London, 1651), by Vincent Wing. In this work the forms A : B :: C : D and A.B :: C.D appear frequently as being equal in meaning. (Smith p406) William Oughtred (1547-1660) was another English mathematician who wrote as follows: A : B = C : D as A B :: C D. He laid extraordinary emphasis upon the use of mathematical symbols; altogether he used over 150 of them. Only 3 have come down to modern times, and one of these is this symbol for proportion. His notation for ratio and proportion was later widely used in England and on the Continent. (Cajori p157). In his Clavis Mathematicae (1631) Oughtred used the dot to indicate either division or ratio, but in his Canones Sinuum (1657) the colon : is used for ratio. He wrote 62496 : 34295 :: 1 : 0 / 54.9- (Smith p 407) As this notation gained ground it freed the dot . for use as the symbol for separation in decimal fractions. It is interesting to note the attitude of Leibniz (1646-1715) toward some of these symbols. On July 29, 1698, he wrote in a letter to John Bernoulli thus ".... in designating ratio I use not one point but two points, which I use at the same time, for division; thus for your dy.x :: dt.a I write dy:x = dt:a; for dy is to x as dt is to a, is indeed the same as, dy divided by x is equal to dt divided by a. From this equation follow then all the rules of proportion. This conception of ratio and proportion was far in advance of that in contemporary arithmetics. (Cajori p158) It is possible that Leibniz, who used : as a general symbol for division, took it from these writers, for he wrote in 1684 x : y quod idem est ac x divis. Per y seu x/y. The hypothesis that the ratio symbol : came from the symbol for division by dropping the bar has no historical basis. Since it is more international than the division symbol, it is probable that the latter symbol will gradually disappear. Various other symbols have been used to indicate division, but they have no particular interest at the present time. (Smith p407) Ratio - the quotient of two numbers or quantities indicating their relative sizes. The ratio of a to b

is written a : b or a/b. The first term is the antecedent and the second the consequent. (Daintith and Nelson p274) The symbol :: for the equality of ratios, now giving way to the common sign for equality, was introduced by Oughtred circa 1628, for he later wrote "proportio, sive ratio aequalis ::" and a Dr. Pell gave it still more standing when he issued Rahn's algebra in English in 1668. The symbol seems to have been arbirarily chosen. This symbol for continued proportion was used by English writers of the 17th and 18th centuries. For example it was used by Isaac Barrow (1630-1677) in his Lectiones Mathematicae (London, 1683), where he wrote "The character is made use of to signify continued Proportionals." It is still commonly seen in French textbooks. (Smith p413)

The symbol for zero

Although the great practical invention of zero has often been attributed to the Hindus, partial or limited developments of the zero concept are clearly evident in a variety of other numeration systems that are at least as early as the Hindu system, if not earlier. The actual effect of any one of these earlier steps in the full development of the zero concept - or, indeed, whether there was any actual effect - is by no means clear, however. The Babylonian sexagesimal system used in the mathematical and astronomical texts was essentially a positional system, even though the zero concept was not fully developed. Many of the Babylonian tablets indicate only a space between groups of symbols if a particular power of sixty was not needed, so the exact powers of sixty that were involved must be determined partly by context. In the later Babylonian tablets (those of the last three centuries B.C.) a symbol was used to indicate a missing power, but this was used only inside a numerical grouping and not at the end. (NCTMp49) Not to be overlooked is the fact that in the sexagesimal notation of integers the "principle of position" was employed. Thus, in 1.4 (=64), the 1 is made to stand for 60, the unit of the second order, by virtue of its position with respect to the 4. The introduction of this principle at so early a date is the more remarkable, because in the decimal notation it was not regurlarly introduced until about the ninth century after Christ. The principle of position, in its general and systemic application, requires a symbol for zero. We ask, Did the Babylonians possess one? Had they already taken the gigantic step of representing by a symbol the absence of units? Babylonian records of many centuries later -of about 200 B.C.-give a symbol for zero which denoted the absence of a figure, but apparently it was not used in calculation. It consisted of two angular marks as illustrated above on the right, one above the other, roughly resembling two dots, hastily written. About 130 A.D. Ptolemy in Alexandria used in his Almagest the Babylonian sexagesimal fractions, and also the omicron o to represent blanks in the sexagesimal numbers. This o was not used as a regular zero. It appears therefore that the Babylonians had the principle of local value, and also a symbol for zero, to indicate the absence of a figure, but did not use this zero in computation.Their sexagesimal fractions were introduced into India and with these fractions probably passed the principle of local value and the restricted use of the zero.

When the Greeks continued the development of astronomical tables, they explicitly chose the Babylonian sexagesimal system to express their fractions, rather than the unit-fraction system of the Egyptians. The repeated subdivision of a part into 60 smaller parts necessitated that sometimes no parts of a given unit were involved, so Ptolemys tables in the Almagest (c. A.D. 150) included both of these symbols for such a designation. Considerably later, in approximately 500, Greek texts used this symbol, the omicron, the first letter of the Greek word ouden (nothing). Earlier usage would have restricted the omicron to symbolizing 70, its value in the regular alphabetic arrangement.

Perhaps the earliest systematic use of a symbol for zero in a place-value system is found in the mathematics of the Mayas of Central and South America. The Mayan zero symbol was used to indicate the absence of any units of the various orders of the modified base-twenty system. This system was probably used much more for recording calendar times than for computational purposes. (NCTM p49) The Maya counted essentially on a scale of 20, using for their basal numerals two elements, a dot representing one and a horizontal dash representing five. The most important feature of their system was their zero, this character as illustrated, which also had numerous variants. (Smith p44) It is possible that the earliest Hindu symbol for zero was the heavy dot that appears in the Bakhshali manuscript, whose contents may date back to the third or fourth century A.D., although some historians place it as late as the twelfth. Any association of the more common small circle of the Hindus with the symbol used by the Greeks would be only a matter of conjecture. (NCTM p50) There is no probability that the origin will ever be known, and there is no particular reason why it should be. We simply know that the world felt the need of a better number system, and that the zero appeared in India as early as the 9th century, and probably some time before that, and was very likely a Hindu invention. In the various forms of numerals used in India, and in later European and Oriental forms, the zero is represented by a small circle or by a dot. Variations include these, as illustrated. (Smith p70) Since the earliest form of the Hindu symbol was commonly used in inscriptions and manuscripts in order to mark a blank, it was called sunya, meaning void or empty. This word passed over into the Arabic as sifr, meaning vacant. This was transliterated in about 1200 into Latin with the sound but not the sense being kept, resulting in zephirum or zephyrum. Various progressive changes of these forms, including zeuero, zepiro, zero, cifra, and cifre, led to the development of our words zero and cipher. The double meaning of the word cipher today - referring either to the zero symbol or to any of the digits - was not in the original Hindu. In early English and American schools the term ciphering referred to doing sums or other computations in

arithmetic. (NCTM p50) The traditional Chinese numeration system is a base-ten system employing nine numerals and additional symbols for the place-value components of powers of ten. Before the eighth century A.D. the place where a zero would be required was always left absent. A circular symbol for zero is first found in a document dating from 1247, but it may have been in use a hundred years earlier. (NCTM p43) Interestingly enough, the forms of the modern Arabic numerals are not the same as the Hindu-Arabic forms of the western world. For example, their numerical representation for five is 0 and their zero is representated by a dot. (NCTM p49) This can be illustrated as shown; (Smith p70)

The various forms of the numerals used in India after the zero appeared may be judged from this table. (Smith p70)

This table illustrates some later European and Oriental forms. (Smith p71)

The name for zero is not settled even yet. Older names and variations include naught, tziphra, sipos, tsiphron, rota, circulus, galgal, theca, null, and figura nihili.(Smith p71)

The radical symbol

The ancient writers commonly wrote the word for root or side, as they wrote other words of similar kind when mathematics was still in the rhetorical stage. The symbol most commonly used by late medieval Latin writers to indicate a root was R , a contraction of radix, and this, with numerous variations, was continued in the printed books for more than a century. Thus it appears as such in the works of Boncompagni (1464), Chuquet (1484), Pacioli (1494), de la Roche (1520), Cardan (1539), Tartaglia (1556), Ghaligai (1521), and Bombelli (1572.) The symbol was also used for other purposes, including response, res, ratio, rex and the familiar recipe in a physician's prescription. Meanwhile, the Arab writers had used various symbols for expressing a root, including this sign on the right, but none of them seem to have influenced European writers.

This symbol first appeared in print in Rudolff's Coss in 1525, but without our modern indices. It is frequently said that Rudolff used this sign because it resembled a small "r", for radix (root), but there is no direct evidence that this is true. The symbol may quite have been an arbitrary invention. It is a fact , however, that in and after the 14th century we find in manuscripts such forms as the following for the letter "r."

It was a long time after these writers that a simple method was developed for indicating any root, and then only as a result of many experiments. French, English, and Italian writers of the 16th century were slow in accepting the German symbol, and indeed the German writers themselves were not wholly favourable to it. The letter l (for latus, side; that is, the side of a square) was often used. In the 17th century our common square-root sign was generally adopted, of course with many variants. The different variants of the root sign are too numerous to mention in detail in this work, particularly as they have little significance. By the close of the 17th century the symbolism was, therefore, becoming fairly well standardised, although there still remained some work to be done. The 18th century saw this accomplished, and it also saw the negative and fractional exponent come more generally into use. Some variations on the radical sign are as follows. The illustrations are the work of many different writers, including Stifel (1553), Gosselin (1557), Ramus-Schoner (1592), Rahn (1659), Stevin (1585), Vlacq, Biondini (1689) and Newton (1707). - for the square root

- for the cube root

-for the fourth root

-for the fifth root

-for the sixth root

-for the eighth root

(Smith p407 - p410) SMITH, D.E. "History of Mathematics" volume II, Dover Publications 1958

The symbols for plus and minus

The symbols of elementary arithmetic are almost wholly algebraic, most of them being transferred to the numerical field only in the 19th century, partly to aid the printer in setting up a page and partly because of the educational fashion then dominant of demanding a written analysis for every problem. When we study the genesis and development of the algebraic symbols of operation, therefore, we include the study of the symbols in arithmetic. Some idea of the status of the latter in this respect may be obtained by looking at almost any of the textbooks of the 17th and 18th centuries. Hodder in 1672 wrote "note that a + (plus) sign doth signifie Addition, and two lines thus = Equality, or Equation, but a X thus, Multiplication," no other symbols being used. His was the first English arithmetic to be reprinted in the American colonies in Boston in 1710. Even Recorde (c1510-1558), who invented the modern sign of equality, did not use it in his arithmetic, the Ground of Artes (c1542), but only in his algebra, the Whetstone of witte (1557). (Smith p395)

There is some symbolism in Egyptian algebra. In the Rhind papyrus we find symbols for plus and minus. The first of these symbols represents a pair of legs walking from right to left, the normal direction for Egyptian writing, and the other a pair of legs walking from left to right, opposite to the direction for Egyptian writing. [Eves 1, p42] The earliest symbols of operation that have come down to us are Egyptian. In the Ahmes Papyrus (c1550 B.C.) addition and subtraction are indicated by these symbols on the left and right above respectively. The Hindus at one time used a cross placed beside a number to indicate a negative quantity, as in the Bakhshali manuscript of possibly the 10th century. With this exception it was not until the 12th century that they made use of the symbols of operation. In the manuscripts of Bhaskara (c1150) a small circle or dot is placed above a subtrahend as illustrated for -6, or the subtrahend is enclosed in a circle to indicate 6 less than zero. The early European symbols for plus are listed opposite. The word plus, used in connection with addition and with the Rule of False Position is not known before the latter part of the 15th century.

The use of the word minus as indicating an operation occurred much earlier, as in the works of Fibonacci (c1175-1250) in1202. The bar above the letter simply indicated an omission. In the 15th century, this third symbol was also often used for minus, but most writers preferred the other variations. In the 16th century the Latin races generally followed the Italian school, using the letters p and m, each with the bar above it, or their equivalents, for plus and minus. However, the German school preferred these symbols, neither of which is found for this purpose before the 15th century. In a manuscript of 1456, written in Germany, the word "et" is used for addition and is generally written so that it closely resembles the modern symbol for addition. There seems little doubt that the sign is merely a ligature for "et", much in the same way that we have the ligature "&" for the word "and." The origin of the minus sign has been more of a subject of dispute. Some have thought that it is a survival of the bar above the three symbols for minus as listed above. It is more probably that it comes from the habit of early scribes of using it as a shorthand equivalent of "m." Thus Summa became Suma with the bar above the letter u, and 10 thousand became an X with ther bar above the letter. It is quite reasonable to think of the dash (-) as a symbol for "m" (minus), just as the cross (+) is a symbol for "et." Other forms of minus are here illustrated. There were other various written forms for plus and minus, as in piu (Italian), mas (Spanish), plus (French) and et (German) for plus and as in de or men (Italian), menos (Spanish), moins (French) for minus. Examples of such usage include:

Pacioli (1494), Italian de or m for minus Tartaglia (1556) and Catanes (1546), Italian, piu and men Santa-Cruz (1594), Spanish, mas and menos Peletier (1549), French, plus and moins Gosselin (1577), P and M Trenchant (1566), + and The expression "plus or minus" is very old, having been in common use by the Romans to indicate simply "more or less". It is often found on Roman tombstones, where the age of the deceased is given as illustrated to indicate "94 years, more or less".

These signs first appeared in print in an arithmetic, but they were not employed as symbols of operation. In the latter sense they appear in algebra long before they do in arithmetic.They appeared in Johann Widman's (c1460-?) arithmetic published in Leipzig in 1489, the author saying: "Was - ist / das ist minus...vnd das + das ist mer." He then speaks of "4 centner + 5 pfund," and also of "4 centner - 17 pfund," thus showing the excess or deficiency in the weight of boxes or bales. (Smith p395 to 399) Observe that Francis Vieta (1540-1603) employed the Maltese cross (+) as the shorthand for addition, and the (-) for subtraction. These two characters had not been in very general use before his time. The introduction of the + and symbols seems to be due to the Germans, who, although they did not enrich algebra during the Renaissance with great inventions, as did the Italians, still cultivated it with great zeal. The arithmetic of John Widmann, brought out in 1489 in Leipzig, is the earliest printed book in which the + and - symbols have been found, and the facsimile shown is from the Augsburg edition of his work, dated 1526. The + sign is not restricted by him to ordinary addition; it has the more general meaning "et" or "and" as in the heading, "regula augmenti + decrementi." The - sign is used to indicate subtraction, but not regularly so. The word "plus" does not occur in Widmann's text; the word "minus" is used only two or three times. The symbols + and - are used regularly for addition and subtraction, in 1521, in the arithmetic of Grammateus, the work of Heinrich Schreiber, a teacher at the University of Vienna. His pupil Christoff Rudolff, the writer of the first text book on algebra in the German language (printed in1525) employs these symbols. So did Michael Stifel, who brought out an improved second edition of Rudolff's book on algebra Die Coss in 1553. Thus, by slow degrees, the adoption of the + and - symbols became universal. Several independant paleograhic studies of Latin manuscripts of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries make it almost certain that the + sign comes from the Latin et, as it was cursively written in manuscripts just before the time of the invention of printing. The origin of the sign - is still uncertain. (Cajori p139) The first one to make use of these signs in writing an algebraic expression was the Dutch mathematician Vander Hoecke, who in 1514 gave this illustration (on the left) for radical three

quarters minus radical three fifths, and for radical 3 add 5 he gave the sign as shown on the right.

These symbols seem to have been employed for the first time in arithmetic, to indicate operations, by Georg Walckl in 1536. The illustration on the left indicates the addition of one third of 230, and the one on the right indicates the subtraction of one fifth of 460. From this time on the two symbols were commonly used by both German and Dutch writers, the particular signs themselves not being settled until well into the 18th century. England adopted the Teutonic forms, and Robert Recorde (c1510-1558) wrote (c1542) "thys fygure +, whiche betoketh to muche, as this lyn, - plaine without a cross lyne, betokeneth to lyttle". As symbols of operation most of the English writers of this period reserved the + and signs for algebra. Thus Digges (1572) in his treatment of algebra: "Then shall you ioyne them with this signe + Plus", and Hylles (1600) says: "The badg or signe of addition is +," stating the sum of 3 and 4 as "3 more 4 are 7," and writing 10___3 for "10 lesse 3." (Smith p399-402)

The symbol for multiplication

William Oughtred (1574-1660) contributed vastly to the propagation of mathematical knowledge in English by his treatises, the Clavis Mathematicae, 1631, published in Latin (English edition 1647), Circles of Proportion, 1632, and Trigonometrie, 1657. Among his most noted pupils are the mathematician John Wallis (1616-1703) and the astronomer Seth Ward. Oughtred laid extraordinary emphasis upon the use of mathematical symbols : altogether he used over 150 of them. Only three have come down to modern times, namely the cross symbol for multiplication, :: as that of proportion, and the symbol for "difference between." The cross symbol, on the left, occurs in the Claris, but the letter X, seen on the right, which closely resembles it, occurs as a sign of multiplication in the anonymous "Appendix to the Logarithmes" in Edward Wright's translation of John Napier's Descriptio, published in 1618. This appendix was most probably written by Oughtred. Leibniz (1646-1715) objected to the use of Oughtred's cross symbol because of possible confusion with the letter X. On 29 July 1698 he wrote in a letter to John Bernoulli : "I do not like (the cross) as a symbol for multiplication, as it is easily confounded with x; .... often I simply relate two quantities by an interposed dot and indicate multiplication by ZC.LM." Through the aid of Christian Wolf (1679-1754) the dot was generally adopted in the 18th century as a symbol for multiplication. Wolf was a professor at Halle, and was ambitious to figure as a successor of Leibniz. Presumably Leibniz had no knowledge that Harriot in his Artis analyticae praxis, 1631, used a dot for multiplication, as in aaa__3.bba=+2.ccc. Harriot's dot received no attention, not even from Wallis. (Cajori p157) The common symbol as illustrated was developed in England about 1600. It was not a new sign, having long been used in cross multiplication, in the check of nines, where Hylles

(1600) speaks of it as the "byas crosse" in connection with the multiplication of terms in the division or addition of fractions, for the purpose of indicating the corresponding products in proportion, and in the "multiplica in croce" of algebra as well as in arithmetic. The symbol was not readily adopted by arithmeticians, being of no practical value to them. In the 18th century some use was made of it in numerical work, but it was not until the second half of the 19th century that it became popular in elementary arithmetic. On account of its resemblance to x it was not well adapted to use in algebra, and so the dot came to be employed, as in 2 . 3 = 6 (Europe) as well as in America. This device seems to have been suggested by the old Florentine multiplication tables; at any rate Adriaen Vlacq (c1600-1667), the Dutch computer (1628), used it in some of his work, thus: factores---- 7 . 17 faci---------119 although not as a real symbol of operation. In his text he uses a rhetorical form, thus; "3041 per 10002 factus erit 30416082." Christopher Clavius (1537-1612), a Jesuit of Rome, wrote in 1583 using the idea of a dot for multiplication, as in 3/5.4/7 for 3/5 X 4/7; and Thomas Harriot (1560-1621) in a posthumous work of 1631 actually used the symbol in a case like 2.aaa = 2a cubed. The first writer of prominence to employ the dot in a general way for algebraic multiplication seems to

The Role of Mathematics in Physics

Mathematics as Abbreviation:
A role that mathematics plays in physics not mentioned in the text is that mathematics is a really great way to get a very concise statement that would take a lot of words in English. For example, Newton's Second Law can be stated as follows: The magnitude of the acceleration of an object is directly proportional to the net force applied to the object, and inversely proportional to the object's mass. The direction of the acceleration is the same as the direction of the net force. Exactly what all of this means is not important (at the moment) - what is important is that the statement above can be expressed mathematically as:

The point is that to a physicist, both statements say exactly the same thing. The symbolism of mathematics can replace a lot of words with just a few symbols.

Mathematics as Concept Map:

Many beginning physicists get the notion that equations in physics are just something to "plug the numbers into and get the answer" - which is one reason that numerical calculation is not emphasized in this physics course. Physicists think differently - equations tell them how concepts are linked together. For instance, this equation arises in the study of kinematics:

The symbol on the left side of the equation represents the concept "average velocity". Since there are two symbols (forgetting the division sign, and the counts as one symbol) on the right side,

to a physicist, the equation says (among other things) that the average velocity of an object depends on two (and only two) other concepts - the object's displacement ( ), and the time it has been moving (t). Thus equations tell scientists how concepts are related to one another.

Mathematics as Mechanized Thinking:

Once an idea is expressed in mathematical form, you can use the rules (axioms, theorems, etc.) of mathematics to change it into other statements. If the original statement is correct, and you follow the rules faithfully, your final statement will also be correct. This is what you do when you "solve" a mathematics problem. From a scientific point of view, however, if you start with one statement about nature, and end up with another statement about nature, what you have been doing is thinking about nature. Mathematics mechanizes thinking. That's why you use it to solve problems! You could (possibly) figure it out without the help of mathematics, but mathematics makes it so much easier because all you have to do is follow the rules! As a very simple example, suppose you start with the equation above, which is often considered to be the definition of average velocity (in mathematical form, of course):

It is a perfectly acceptable mathematical operation to multiply both sides of an equation by a variable, so multiply both sides of this equation by "t". You get:

On the right side, the rules of algebra say that t/t = 1, so it must be true that:

And the commutative property of algebra says that this is the same as:

This is a new statement about nature (equivalent to the familiar "distance equals speed times time") - derived using the rules of mathematics. Using mathematics, physicists can discover new relationships among physical quantities - mathematics mechanizes thinking.

MATHEMATICS AND BIOLOGY:

NTRODUCTION To most of our ordinary experiences the world of our conscious perceptions that surrounds us is a crooked conundrum of randomness. The world contains the seemingly nondeterministic free will of organisms, the puzzling purple haze of consciousness, complex emotions as love, the unpredictable tsunamis uprooting lives, and the infinite alter-egos in parallel universes. The infinite nature of our mysterious universe filled with galaxies, black holes tend to force a limit to the extent things can be known. But, Man has accepted the challenge with the discovery of mathematics, the precision language in which Mother Nature speaks. Galileo once wrote: The book of nature is written in the language of mathematics. Platonics may even argue that the world of mathematics exists independent of our naming it. There is remarkable depth, subtlety and mathematical fruitfulness in the concepts that lie latent within any physical system. Mathematics strongly prizes rigor and precision. Mathematical fact is immutable, and successful mathematical theories have lifetimes of hundreds or thousands of years. By contrast, most of our knowledge of biological systems is comparatively recent, and most biological theories evolve rapidly. Historically, it has been excluded from the quantitative mathematical culture.One of the major reasons is the apparent non-determinism in every biological system which superficially seems to fall out from precise mathematical linearity. However, with the advent of quantum theory, theory of chaos, and non-linear mathematical models of physical systems, an explosive synergy between the two fields with immense potential was readily discernable. The interface between mathematics and biology has initiated and fostered newer approaches in both the fields. THE IMPACT OF BIOLOGY ON MATHEMATICS Accomplishments of the Past The application of mathematics to biology is not new; neither is evidence of impacts on mathematics. Robert Brown, a botanist, discovered what is now called Brownian motion while watching pollen grains in water. Today, the mathematical description of such motion is central to probability theory. The theories of dynamical systems and partial differential equations represent areas of mathematics in which numerous fruitful lines of inquiry were prompted by biological questions, and in which such influences continue to be felt. In theoretical fluid mechanics, the dominant classical stream of development was toward understanding of high Reynolds number (almost inviscid) flow and of compressible flows; biology has motivated a great many new developments in viscosity dominated flows (Purcell 1977). More recently, molecular biology has stimulated advances in analysis and lowdimensional topology and geometry. Statistics and Stochastic Processes Statistics is perhaps the most widely used mathematical science. It has achieved its present position as a consequence of an intellectual development begun during the 19th century. Stigler (1986) noted that from the doctrine of chances to the calculus of probabilities, from least squares to regression analysis, the advances in scientific logic that took place in statistics before 1900 were to be every bit as influential as those associated with the names of Newton and Darwin. The quantitative study of biological inheritance and evolution

provided an outstanding context for statistical thinking, and quantitative genetics remains the best example of an area of science whose very theory is built out of the concepts of statistics. The great stimulus for modern statistics came from Galton's invention of the method of correlation, which he first conceived not as an abstract technique of numerical analysis, but as a statistical law of heredity (Porter 1986). The profound problems raised by Darwin's insight have led to new fields of mathematical science. Likewise, problems in eugenics and plant breeding were the motivation for Fisher's statistical work (Fisher 1930). The analysis of variance and the theory of experimental design were developed to interpret and plan plant breeding experiments at the Experimental Station at Rothamsted, an institution that continues to be a major influence on statistical theory and practice. The benefits to mankind of these and later biometrical developments have been enormous. The "Green revolution" in agriculture would have been quite impossible without these tools. The influence of biology on probability theory and statistics has been equally strong in later years of this century. Neyman, Park and Scott (1956) developed stochastic models in order to interpret experiments of Park on flour beetles. In these experiments, two competing species of beetles were pitted in competition. To Park's surprise, the outcome of a given experiment could not be predicted; but in a long series of experiments, the statistical distribution of outcomes was predictable. Population Models The study of simple population models provides a classic example of stimulation of mathematics by biology with resulting benefits to both. For example, iterations of a single nonlinear function, described via a population model of a simple kind, capture the dynamics of an isolated population with discrete generations, subject to influences that regulate the population numbers exclusively through the population size. More explicitly, the population size at generation (n+1) is assumed to be a given nonlinear function of the population size at generation (n). Models of this type were introduced in population studies a long time ago. However, it was only in the 1970's that a widespread appreciation for the depth and beauty of the mathematical phenomena involved in these mathematical problems emerged. The motivation from population biology was an important part of the chain of historical events that led to very significant scientific and mathematical discoveries. Nonlinear Partial Differential and Functional Equations Nonlinear partial differential and functional equations traditionally have been applied in the physical sciences. But several examples highlight the seminal impact of biological ideas on mathematical research in this area. The theory of diffusion, which describes the behavior of a population of randomly moving particles or molecules, exemplifies an area traditionally viewed within the context of chemistry or physics. However, the mathematics of nonlinear diffusion equations has received much of its impetus from biology. Fisher's (1937) interest in the problem of the spread of advantageous genes in a population stimulated his consideration of an equation that incorporates diffusion augmented by a simple ("logistic") nonlinear growth term. It was treated simultaneously by Kolmogorov et al. (1937), who proved the existence of a stable traveling wave of fixed velocity representing a wave of advance of the advantageous gene. These problems will continue to be a fertile area of mathematical research since current mathematical and numerical approaches are only partially adequate for addressing these issues.

THE IMPACT OF MATHEMATICS ON BIOLOGY 1. Impact on Cellular and Molecular Biology 2. DNA Structure 3. Macromolecular Sequences 4. Model Based Approach for Biological Sequence and Networks 5. Genetic Mapping 6. Cell Motility 7. Structural Biology 8. Molecular Dynamics Simulation 9. Drug Design MIND, BRAIN AND MATHEMATICS A Digression in Philosophy Cartesian substance dualism pictures the world as constituting of two independent domains, the mental and the material, each with its distinct defining properties (consciousness and spatial extendedness respectively). There is causal interaction between the two but they are ontologically independent of each other and it is metaphysically possible for one domain to exist in the total absence of the other (Kim, 2000). However, from scientific point of view, to think of a dualistic mind that is external to the body and influencing our choices may be arguably unreasonable. It can be argued that if will could somehow influence Natures choice of alternatives then why an experimenter cannot influence the result of a quantum experiment via his will power (Penrose, 1994). Over time the dualistic viewpoint has been replaced by the more familiar multilayered system model that views the world to be hierarchically organized into various levels. This is essentially a grand synthesis of diverse elements into an integrated hierarchical system which allows us to formulate testable hypothesis of a particular function at one level by another one. However, the system of organization, as limited by our current understanding, is fundamentally a bottom-up perspective. STUDY METHOD Physics Chemistry Biology Neurology Computer Science Psychology OBJECT OF STUDY Properties of wave particle, fields Ions, transmitters and receptors Cells, neurons Neuronal System Networks Consciousness, thoughts and behaviors

If it is possible to explain the behavior of ions with the help of physics, there is no reason that the same principle will not be effective to explain as complex phenomenon as human consciousness (Given that both are part of the same complex system, rejecting dualism).

Biological Challenges that Could Stimulate Innovations in Mathematics y Many current and future challenges for statistics and probability that are motivated by questions in molecular biology, genetics, and molecular evolution will require new

y y

techniques and theories. One such set of challenges involves the use of DNA sequence data to reconstruct phylogenetic trees, analyze genetically complex traits precisely, and study other problems. This is particularly important after the completion of the Genomic Project. The complex networks of gene interactions, proteins, and signaling between cells and the abiotic environment is probably incomprehensible without innovative mathematical structure. Understanding Brain-behavior relationship is a complex system problem which might require modification in the current mathematical approaches. Monitor living systems to detect large deviations such as natural or induced epidemics or physiological or ecological pathologies (Weinstein et al., 1997).

Mathematical Challenges that Would Contribute to Progress in Biology y Appropriate statistical tools need to be developed to model multi-level biological data. It is clear now that no single model will meet all the analysis needs. To deal with the complexity of biological processes, computational biology must develop methodology to explore different models with varying details and rapidly apply them to diverse data sets. The language of graphical models is well suited for composing different sub-models in a principled and understandable fashion. Understand probability, risk, and uncertainty:Despite three centuries of great progress, we are still at the very beginning of a true understanding. There is a need to synthesize existing theories or invent newer innovative approaches. There is a need to set standards for clarity, performance, publication and permanence of software and computational results. Probably the ultimate understanding of biological systems (as well as Nature) depends upon the successful unification of Quantum theory with classical physics or modification of both.

y y

CONCLUSION Unlike physical sciences, mathematics has been less intrusive in the biological sciences because of the largely descriptive nature of the later, lacking the invariance principles and fundamental natural constants of physics. However, in the recent decades mathematics has become pervasive across all the branches of biological sciences, allowing for healthy interaction between the two. There is immense scope for understanding the fundamental rules of Nature when mathematics marries biology. The coming decades will see enormous growth of mathematical application in biological sciences, providing biologists the extrasense which Darwin once longed for.

How does mathematics relate to psychology?

Statistics is a branch of mathematics, and statistics is vital to any experimental science. Without statistics, you cannot tell whether the results of the experiment you've just performed are telling you something useful, or whether they are just down to chance. Many statistical techniques were developed in response to a need arising in psychology - a famous example is factor analysis, which is one of the principal justifications for the use of IQ (or the "general intelligence factor" g) as a measure of innate intelligence. Without sophisticated mathematics, the field of intelligence testing could not have developed as it has today. Mathematics is also beginning to be more widely used in some of the more 'theoretical' aspects of psychology. For example, machine learning techniques which use advanced mathematics (nearest neighbor algorithms, decision trees, support vector machines) can be seen as simple models of the ways in which our brains make decisions. Neural networks are another, heavily mathematical field which will probably become more important to psychology in the future.

Finally, mathematical models of neural interactions are beginning to be important in modelling the ways in which our brain processes external data, such as light and sound, into meaningful cognitive experiences like sight and hearing. Mathematical models of the visual cortex are at an early stage, but look promising.

Mathematics and Economics

Abstract
The interconnection of mathematics and economics reflects changes in both the mathematics and economics communities over time. The respective histories of these disciplines are intertwined, so that both changes in mathematical knowledge and changing ideas about the nature of mathematical knowledge have effected changes in the methods and concerns of economist

Mathematics and Economics

Understanding the nature and role of mathematical economics is not the same as understanding the connection between mathematics and economics. Mathematical economics, as Debreu in this volume (mathematical economics) argues, is the employment of mathematics in economics itself. Explaining or justifying mathematical economics often involves essentialist arguments concerning the true nature of economic objects, and the true nature of the economy, as well as arguments suggesting that employing mathematics is appropriate since the underlyingeconomy is quantitative in nature. Consequently an historical discussion of mathematical economics will be a narrative of increased sophistication over time in economics as mathematical tools, techniques, and methods move into economic discourse and

enrich economic analysis.

Mathematics and Language

Just as language functions in organizing mental activity, and is so essential to social formation andindividual construction of mathematical ideas, all mathematical experience is conditioned by language. Consequently linguistic reduction is inevitable in any mathematical construction to locate and condition broader cogitations. Many contemporary writers on language do not view language as providing and unproblematic labeling of the world (Brown: 1994) Bertrand Russells statement analytical philosophys notion of language picturing reality is no longer an adequate metaphor to show how language functions.(Russell. 1914) When the child is exposed to the language, the child is not taught the grammatical or the syntactical rules of the language. He or she learns it through experiencing the objects in the environment. He or she starts to learn words to describe desires, emotions and needs. Once the informal exposure is complete, i.e., the native language is learned implicitly, they would begin the explicit exposure to language. Similarly, mathematics is language that is taught explicitly just like any language concentrating on grammar, syntax, and vocabulary. However, explicit learners confront problems in understanding the subtleties of the language, its idioms, its way of saying. Implicit learners, on the other hand, do not have sufficient knowledge of the underlined structure rules, and syntax. Rene Thom (1973) in his article on Modern mathematics: does it exist? argues whether mathematics should be taught first implicitly then explicitly. He considers that formal definitions, structures, and symbolic descriptions comprise explicit language whereas implicit language learning is by direct use as an alien child would naturally learn it if immersed into this linguistic society. Robert Moore in his article Making the transition to formal proof states that students encountered some difficulties in learning mathematics when we look at it as a language (1994: 249-266.). He found sevenajor sources of difficulty: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Students did not know or were unable to state definitions; They had little intuitive understanding of the concepts; They had inadequate concept images; They were unable or unwilling to generate and use their examples; They did not know how to use definitions; They were unable to understand and use mathematical language and notation;

They did not know how to begin proof. These are specific examples encountered in learning the language of mathematics at almost any stage of mathematical development. It needs to be clarified that whether it be learning a language or mathematics,the skills required in learning both are not very different. They are both learned with varying degrees of success and interest and this does not mean that learning mathematics or any other language is the domain of the gifted and talented. Through practice we can all learn mathematics; if the suitable conditions are created and provided to the students, learning will be an easy process and will be definite.

Underexposure to mathematics and language hinders mathematical development as well as language skills therefore it becomes possible to say that if you do not use it, you lose it belief becomes valid for both math and language. Hence daily practice in reading, writing, and mathematics from an early age will facilitate learning at further stages. The use of mathematical concepts or terms in everyday language may at times lead to ambiguities. For example, the word and the number zero bring different associations depending on the context it is used.

Shapes Related With Other Disciplines

Triangle related with physics

Physics Examples

Because one physical quantity often depends on another, which, in turn depends on others, such as time, related rate methods have broad applications in Physics. This section presents an example of related rates kinematics and electromagnetic induction. [edit]Physics

Example I: Relative Kinematics of Two Vehicles

One vehicle is headed North and currently located at (0,3); the other vehicle is headed West and currently located at (4,0). The chain rule can be used to find whether they are getting closer or further apart.

For example, one can consider the kinematics problem where one vehicle is heading West toward an intersection at 80 miles per hour while another is heading North away from the intersection at 60 miles per hour. One can ask whether the vehicles are getting closer or further apart and at what rate at the moment when the North bound vehicle is 3 miles North of the intersection and the West bound vehicle is 4 miles East of the intersection. Big idea: use chain rule to compute rate of change of distance between two vehicles. Plan: 1. Choose coordinate system 2. Identify variables 3. Draw picture

4. Big idea: use chain rule to compute rate of change of distance between two vehicles 5. Express c in terms of x and y via Pythagorean theorem 6. Express dc/dt using chain rule in terms of dx/dt and dy/dt 7. Substitute in x, y, dx/dt, dy/dt 8. Simplify. Choose coordinate system: Let the y-axis point North and the x-axis point East. Identify variables: Define y(t) to be the distance of the vehicle heading North from the origin and x(t) to be the distance of the vehicle heading West from the origin. Express c in terms of x and y via Pythagorean theorem:

c = (x2 + y2)1 / 2
Express dc/dt using chain rule in terms of dx/dt and dy/dt:

Apply derivative operator to entire function

Square root is outside function; Sum of squares is inside function

Distribute differentiation operator

Apply chain rule to x(t) and y(t)}

Simplify.

Substitute in x = 4 mi, y = 3 mi, dx/dt = -80 mi/hr, dy/dt = 60 mi/hr and Simplify

Consequently, the two vehicles are getting closer together at a rate of 28 mi/hr. [edit]Physics Example II: Electromagnetic induction of conducting loop spinning in magnetic field Faraday's law of electromagnetic induction states that the induced electromotive force is the negative time rate of change of magnetic flux through a conducting loop.

where

is the electromotive force (emf) in volts and

is the magnetic flux in webers. For a loop of

constant area, A, spinning at an angular velocity of given by

in a uniform magnetic field, B, the magnetic flux is

where

is the angle between the normal to the current loop and the magnetic field direction. Since the , the angle is increasing linearly in time, = t, and the magnetic flux

loop is spinning at a constant rate, can be written as

Taking the negative derivative of the flux with respect to time yields the electromotive force. Electromotive force in terms of derivative

Bring constants (A and B) outside of derivative

Apply chain rule, differentiate outside function (cosine)

Cancel out two negative signs

Evaluate remaining derivative

Simplify.

Triangle Related With Engineering

Vector Addition
mechanics there are two kind of quantities

y y

scalar quantities with magnitude - time, temperature, mass etc. vector quantities with magnitude and direction - velocity, force etc.

When adding vector quantities both magnitude and direction are important. Common methods adding coplanar vectors (vectors acting in the same plane) are

y y y

the parallelogram law the triangle rule trigonometric calculation

The Parallelogram Law

The procedure of "the parallelogram of vectors addition method" is

y y y y

draw vector 1 using appropriate scale and in the direction of its action from the tail of vector 1 draw vector 2 using the same scale in the direction of its action complete the parallelogram by using vector 1 and 2 as sides of the parallelogram the resulting vector is represented in both magnitude and direction by the diagonal of the parallelogram

The Triangle Rule

The procedure of "the triangle of vectors addition method" is

y y y

draw vector 1 using appropriate scale and in the direction of its action from the nose of the vector draw vector 2 using the same scale and in the direction of its action the resulting vector is represented in both magnitude and direction by the vector drawn from the tail of vector 1 to the nose of vector 2

Trigonometric Calculation

The resulting vector of two coplanar vector can be calculated by trigonometry using "the cosine rule" for a non-right-angled triangle.

FR = [ F12 + F22 2 F1 F2 cos(180o - ( + )) ]1/2 where F = the vector quantity - force, velocity etc. + = angle between vector 1 and 2

(1)

The angle between the vector and the resulting vector can be calculated using "the sine rule" for a non-right-angled triangle. = sin-1 [ F1 sin(180o - ( + )) / FR ] where + = the angle between vector 1 and 2 is known (2)

Example - Calculating Vector Forces

A force 1 of magnitude 3 kN is acting in a direction 80o from a force 2 of magnitude 8 kN. The resulting force can be calculated as FR = [ (3 kN)2 + (8 kN)2 - 2 (5 kN)(8 kN) cos(180o - (80o)) ]1/2 = 9 kN The angle between vector 1 and the resulting vector can be calculated as = sin-1[ (3 kN) sin(180o - (80o)) / (9 kN) ] = 19.1o The angle between vector 2 and the resulting vector can be calculated as = sin-1[ (8 kN) sin(180o - (80o)) / (9 kN) ] = 60.9o

Triangle related With geography

For over forty years, the Bermuda Triangle has been popularly known for supposedly paranormal disappearances of boats and aircraft. This imaginary triangle, also known as "Devil's Triangle," has its three points at Miami, Puerto Rico, and Bermuda. Actually, despite several factors which should contribute to higher rates of accidents in the region, the Bermuda Triangle has been found to be no more statistically dangerous than other areas of the open ocean.

he popular legend of the Bermuda Triangle began with a 1964 article in the magazineArgosy that described and named the Triangle. Further articles and reports in such magazines as National Geographic and Playboymerely repeated the legend without additional research. Many of the disappearances discussed in these articles and others did not even occur in the area of the Triangle.