Symbolic Form.-Restricting consideration, for the present, to binary forms in a single pair of variables, we must introduce the symbolic form of Aronhold, Clebsch and Gordan; they write the form Iln n n-1 n-1 n n n aixi+a2x2) = 44+(1) a l a 2 x 1 x2+...+a2.x2=az wherein al, a2 are umbrae, such that n-1 n-1 n a 1, a 1 a 2, ...a 1 a 2, a2 are symbolical respreentations of the real coefficients ï¿½o, ai,...
If we restrict ourselves to this set of symbols we can uniquely pass from a product of real coefficients to the symbolic representations of such product, but we cannot, uniquely, from the symbols recover the real form, This is clear because we can write n-1 n-2 2 2n-3 3 a1a2 =a l a 2, a 1 a 2 = a 1 a2 while the same product of umbrae arises from n n-3 3 2n-3 3 aoa 3 = a l .a a 2 = a a 2 .
1 1 Hence it becomes necessary to have more than one set of umbrae, so that we may have more than one symbolical representation of the same real coefficients.
= a k; and if we wish to denote, by umbrae, a product of coefficients of degree s we employ s sets of umbrae.
We write;L 22 = a 1 a 2 .b 1 n-2 b2s 3 n - 3 3 n-3 3 n-3 3 a 3 = a 1 a 2 .b 1 b 2 .c 1 c2, and so on whenever we require to represent a product of real coefficients symbolically; we then have a one-to-one correspondence between the products of real coefficients and their symbolic forms. If we have a function of degree s in the coefficients, we may select any s sets of umbrae for use, and having made a selection we may when only one quantic is under consideration at any time permute the sets of umbrae in any manner without altering the real significance of the symbolism.
How would you define umbrae? Add your definition here.