$ x_{i,j}^{ k}$
May I say the following to say the above notation?
x sub i j to k ?
x sub i j sup(prounced like "soup") k ? (Can I say "soup" for "superscript"?
Could you please show me a proper way to say the above notation?
|
$ x_{i,j}^{ k}$ May I say the following to say the above notation? x sub i j to k ? x sub i j sup(prounced like "soup") k ? (Can I say "soup" for "superscript"? Could you please show me a proper way to say the above notation? |
||||
| show 1 more comment |
|
IMHO: If all of the items have the same sub/super script structure (such as tensors with the same index patterns), then I don't see any harm in saying the indeces without saying "sub" or "sup". For example, I'd say "$x$ $i$ $j$ $k$" for $x_{i,j}^k$. In lectures, this works out just fine, especially when accompanied by the symbol $x_{i,j}^k$ on the board. |
|||
|
As long as you're understood I don't think there's a proper way. I would say "soup" or "super" and I am a native English speaker. But there may also be a different way to talk about it (e.g., "All the upper indices do X" or "Those dimensions vanish") depending on your final message. |
||||
|
|
|
If the superscript $k$ is an exponent and $i,j$ are indices, I would say "x sub i j to the k", or even "x i j to the k", or least ambiguously "the k'th power of x sub i j". If $x_{i,j}^{k}$ has some other meaning then "x sub i j sup k" is a fine way to refer to how the expression is written but I would prefer the other phrase when raising $x_{i,j}$ to the power of $k$ is what is meant. |
|||
|
|
pronunciation. Please let me know if this a bad idea. – user2468 Jul 28 '12 at 23:16