Paul,
>> Well, I've got, for example, N(x,y), which is the sum of t(n) -- or,
>> later,
>> t_J(n) --
>
> You mean t = t_J is a particular case. You should probably "tag" with
> "t": like N(x, y, t).
So maybe it would be N(x, y, t) for the arbitrary case and N(x, y,
t_{J}(n))
for the non-arbitrary?
What I thought would help most is if I could say that t(n) is a value a,
and
if a is arbitrary it is denoted by A, so we have N(x,y,A) and c(n,A), and
if
a is determined by divisibility, it's N(x,y,J) and c(n,J). How does that
sound? If OK, how would I write out my initial definition/function?
>
>> in a given interval [x,y];
>
> _over_ [x, y]. (If you still have all intervals of the same length, you
> would be doing everybody a favor if you dropped the redundant "y".)
Good thought.
>> and indeed about 4 others that are
>> sum_t(n) in such-and-such a set
>
> Why the subscript?
Sorry; "sum_" wasn't meant to imply it is followed by a subscript.
Is "t" the subscript or is it "t(n)"? Do you mean
> t(n) is something other than an integer? That is t : |N -> |N is no
> longer true? If so, you _do_ have problems.
No, it's always an integer.
>> for values of such-and-such n in [x,y], and
>> so on. That's what has worried me all along.
With thanks.
|
