When solving equations like

$$\begin{align} 4x-4 &=\frac{(2x)^2}{x} \\ -4 &= \frac{4x^2}{x} -4x \\ -4 &= 4x -4x \\[0.2em] -4 &= 0\end{align}$$

using the equality-symbol feels like abuse of notation, since you'll end up with $-4=0$, which is not an equality. For instance I feel it would be better to write

$$\begin{align} 4x-4 &\:\Box\:\frac{(2x)^2}{x} \\ -4 &\:\Box\: \frac{4x^2}{x} -4x \\ -4 &\:\Box\: 4x -4x \\[0.4em] -4 &\:\Box\: 0 \\[0.3em] -4 &\neq 0\end{align}$$

So I was wondering if there's a symbol or any other notations being used when trying to solve such an equation where you don't know if there's an equality?

  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I'm sure a lot of people have wondered about this. I do to, and so did math.stackexchange.com/questions/885192/… and math.stackexchange.com/questions/109161/… $\endgroup$
    – David K
    Sep 19 '14 at 14:00
  • $\begingroup$ Go ahead and use a box if you want. Maybe you are trying to decide among $<$, $>$, and $=$, for example. Make sure your steps are reversible, and go for it. $\endgroup$
    – GEdgar
    Sep 19 '14 at 14:03
  • $\begingroup$ I found your questions when I searched around, but it bothered me that they were for inequalities with > and <, and not inequalities with = and ≠. Your ideas were nice though. $\endgroup$
    – Frank Vel
    Sep 19 '14 at 14:07
  • $\begingroup$ I sometimes use a question mark, for instance when comparing two numbers: $\sqrt{2}-1\mathrel{?}1/2$; $\sqrt{2}\mathrel{?}3/2$; $2\sqrt{2}\mathrel{?}3$; $8\mathrel{?}9$ (going to a new line, usually, at the blackboard). So at the end we know that ? is $<$, because we used only transformation that don't change the direction of inequalities. Any symbol is good. $\endgroup$
    – egreg
    Sep 19 '14 at 15:02

I put a question mark above an equal sign, like this: $\stackrel{?}=$. (In MathJax, just type $\stackrel{?}=$.)

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Or even $\overset{?}=$. $\endgroup$ Feb 9 '19 at 19:17

It's perfectly fine to have equality signs.

When you solve equations, what you really do is say

Assume that the following is true




is true.

Contradiction, the original assumption is false.

  • $\begingroup$ Agreed, and I would add that it's useful to be clear in the surrounding text about whether any given equation is a statement of something known to be true or the starting point of a possible proof by contradiction. $\endgroup$
    – David Z
    Sep 19 '14 at 20:15
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This style only works if one knows from the outset that the equation is not going to have any solutions. But it seems to me that OP is in a context where one is trying to establish whether there are any solutions (and in the end it turns out: no). $\endgroup$ Sep 21 '14 at 6:35
  • $\begingroup$ @MarcvanLeeuwen Actually if there is solutions, this does work, it's not a proof by contradiction, though. You just end up with: Assume that $x-2=5$ is true, then $x=7$ is true $\endgroup$
    – Alice Ryhl
    Sep 21 '14 at 10:37
  • $\begingroup$ I feel these are two different questions: "Is there a solution to this equation?" and "What is the relation between these two expressions?" and I was hoping for an answer to the latter. In any case their answer might be the same "There is a solution ⇔ These expressions have an equality", but I was hoping for some new notations to avoid having to assume things to begin with. $\endgroup$
    – Frank Vel
    Sep 21 '14 at 13:03

I like to put the $\iff$ (if and only if) symbol at the beginning of every new line, like this: $$\begin{align} 4x-4 &=\frac{(2x)^2}{x} \\ \iff-4 &= \frac{4x^2}{x} -4x \\ \iff-4 &= 4x -4x \\[0.2em] \iff-4 &= 0\end{align}$$ So $4x-4=\frac{(2x)^{2}}{x}$ if and only if $-4=0$, which is true.

  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Maybe a different last word? ;-) $\endgroup$
    – egreg
    Sep 19 '14 at 15:03
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Sorry, that's a little ambiguous isn't it. I mean that the entire statement is true, obviously $-4 \ne 0$! $\endgroup$ Sep 19 '14 at 15:05
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ in the last sentence, you mean $(2x)^2$ not $2x^2$ in the numerator of the fraction. $\endgroup$
    – Joao
    Sep 20 '14 at 4:31
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ But your second $\iff$ is not justified, since in the direction $\Leftarrow$ you are dividing by $x$. (You may consider yourself saved here by the fact that for $x=0$ it reads "meaningless $\Leftarrow$ false", but you don't know that yet when you first write it.) The point is, the reasoning is really $\implies$ here, and arriving at an absurdity one concludes that the initial equation cannot be satisfied, which is what $\implies$ gives you. $\endgroup$ Sep 21 '14 at 6:43
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I should have put $(x \ne 0)$ in there somewhere, but in truth I was being lazy abd just copied the block of equations straight from the OP. Well spotted though! $\endgroup$ Sep 21 '14 at 8:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.