0
$\begingroup$

In high school physics, I often saw the equation: $$\Sigma\vec{F}=m\vec{a}$$At the time, I understood it as "the net force is the sum of all forces acting on a body." Now that I’m studying mathematics at university, I’ve been thinking more formally about vectors. Since $\vec{F}$ is a vector then the sum of all the forces should formally be notated as: $$\sum\vec{F}$$ With the sum operator instead of the greek letter $\Sigma$.

Q: Is $\sum\vec{F}$ equivalent to $\Sigma \vec{F} $? Or is it just a notation that is used for simplicity's sake?

New contributor
Antony Theo. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.
$\endgroup$
5
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Why should we care? It’s the vector sum of all the forces $\endgroup$
    – Bob D
    Commented 2 days ago
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Strictly speaking larger operator should be used for summation as letter only may mean something else. But conventionally plain capital sigma is not used often for other variables; smaller sigma $\sigma$ sometimes means surface charge though. See also Einstein's summation. $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • $\begingroup$ I don't understand the distinction you're asking about in the last line. You ask if $\Sigma$ is equivalent to $\sum$ in that context, that I understand. But I don't understand what you mean by "simplicity's sake" later. How does using one over the other simplifies anything here? $\endgroup$
    – Amit
    Commented 2 days ago
  • $\begingroup$ It's the same thing, the sigma letter $\Sigma$ of the same size as $\vec{F}$ is just a simpler and worse typography. $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago
  • $\begingroup$ Isn't all notation arbitrary? $\endgroup$
    – M. Enns
    Commented 2 days ago

3 Answers 3

1
$\begingroup$

Newton’s law, correctly stated with a summation, is

$$\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}F_i=ma$$

for mass $m$, acceleration of the system $a$, and all $n$ forces considered $F_0,F_1,…,F_{n-1}$.

I don’t know why someone would type a regular uppercase sigma instead of a summation symbol but in any case that’s probably what they meant (a summation over all forces). MathJax has a command \sum that does all the fancy superscripts and subscripts for you, but if you saw something like $\Sigma F$ the author likely meant a sum and didn’t have access to MathJax or LaTeX or the like and had to deal with a regular sigma.

Beware, though, because in some advanced physics (like Kerr black hole stuff) people sometimes use $\sigma$ as an abbreviation for other expressions instead of as an operator. In that context you’d almost always see the full-size summation symbol anyway, so it’s not a huge worry but I thought I’d tack it on anyway.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

This is not a physics question, it's a notation question. In most books, you'll find

$$\sum \vec{F} =m\vec{a}, $$

where $\sum$ is the summation symbol. The expression

$$\Sigma \vec{F}=m\vec{a} $$

using "\Sigma" instead of "\sum" is sometimes also used, especially when referring to the equation within a paragraph (as in $\Sigma \vec{F}$). They mean the same thing.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

The sum operator $\sum$ is just the greek letter $\Sigma$ (= S in our alphabet) but bigger. It's not an accident. It's just the first S of the word "Sum". It's the same reason why we use a "long S" for the integral sign: $\int$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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