4
$\begingroup$

I've seen someone asking a question with $\gneq$ ($\gneq$) in it. What does it mean? What's the difference with $\geq$ ($\geq$)?

  • 1
    "gneq" means "greater than not equal". For the meaning, we will need to see some context. If it is in a question, then there is a natural place to get clarification, right?2011-12-08
  • 1
    But I am waiting to hear for someone, that is the question correctly posed ? , or there is a need for some edit ?2011-12-08
  • 0
    @GEdgar : But we can simply use "greater than sign" which means that they are not equal implicitly2011-12-08
  • 2
    @iyengar:The title seems correct to me and the difference is only the second part of the question.2011-12-08
  • 0
    @MaX : That's what I told2011-12-08
  • 1
    @iyengar: The question is fine. The OP has asked for the distinction between two symbols. You think they should ask about other symbols; that is your opinion.2011-12-08
  • 0
    It's been a long time, but I vaguely recall that when talking about partially ordered sets and lattices and the like, one often sees $<$ with the condition $a, so that $<$ will sometimes "really" be $leq$. This is similar to the existence of notations $\subset$, $\subseteq$, and $\subsetneq$2011-12-08
  • 0
    @ZevChonoles : Then According to OP question it means that he is asking the difference between $A\gneq B$ and $A\ge B$ , we can surely tell the difference the former one allows $A$ not equal to $B$ but latter one allows $A$ to be equal to $B$, what do you say?2011-12-08
  • 0
    But I think the question should be "What's the difference between $\gneq$ and $\gt$ ? , as if $A\gneq B$ it implicitly means that $A\gt B$, but what's the need of using the different symbols then, we can directly use $A \gt B$ as it means implicitly that "$A $ is greater than $B$, which implies that they are not equal anymore, so I think that $\gneq$ and $\gt$ mean the same, Don't they ?2011-12-08
  • 0
    We need the context. When writing $A \gneq B$, what are $A,B$? Maybe there is some meaning defined for rather frugal loopoids $A,B$ and $A \gneq B$ and $A \ge B$ have different meanings... So we must await the return of Oltarus to find the source.2011-12-08

2 Answers 2

8

I would think $\gneq$ means exactly the same as $>$, i.e. it would mean greater than and not equal to (while the symbol $\geq$ means greater than or equal to). But of course there may be some specialized use where it doesn't mean this though; everything depends on context.

In the context of the question you linked to, I can say with certainty that the intended meaning is the one above. That is,

$$n\gneq 3 \iff n>3 \iff n\text{ is greater than }3$$ and, because $n$ is an integer in this context, we can also say that $$n\gneq 3\iff n\geq 4.$$

As Rasmus points out below, the analogous notations with set inclusion, $\subset$ vs. $\subsetneq$, unfortunately do not mean the same in general; many authors use $A \subset B$ to mean "$A$ is a subset of $B$, and could be equal to $B$". An unambiguous alternative to express that would be to write $\subseteq$.

  • 1
    What is the specialized context?2011-12-08
  • 0
    This is clearly the general usage. It might be worthwile to point out that the set-theoretic notation $\subset$ is not universally used for proper inclusion. To be on the safe side, most people only use $\subseteq$ and $\subsetneq$.2011-12-08
  • 0
    @iyengar: I don't know. That's why I said **may**.2011-12-08
  • 0
    @Rasmus: Thanks for the suggestion, I've *included* that (ha!)2011-12-08
  • 0
    @ZevChonoles : you suggested me that question was fine, but you look at it once, the OP asked the difference between $\gneq$ and $\ge$, but your answer was telling the difference between $\gneq$ and $\gt$, thats why I have been saying that question should be edited, and you said its "fine".2011-12-08
  • 0
    @iyengar: My answer is not telling the difference between $\gneq$ and $>$, it was *explaining the meaning of $\gneq$ by claiming it is interchangeable with $>$*. At any rate I have now included a comment contrasting this with $\geq$.2011-12-08
  • 0
    @ZevChonoles : But that is not the one OP asked2011-12-08
  • 2
    @iyengar: If one says "A means the same as B", where B is widely considered to have a different meaning than C, then one has explained the difference between A and C.2011-12-08
  • 0
    @ZevChonoles : "OP asked that what is the difference between $\gneq$ and $\ge$, but your answer was primarily explaining the similarity between $\gneq$ and $gt$ ( recently you added something in the answer present in brackets ) , but the point I was stressing was that "OP might have thought to ask the difference between the $\gneq$ and $gt$ but used "$\ge$ " instead of "$\gt"$, if the question is re-edited it would make much sense, but the question present in the above form is universally known as everyone knows the difference between $\gneq$ and $ge$. You understood my point ?2011-12-08
3

$ a \geq b$ means that $a$ is greater than $b$ or it can be equal to $b$.

$a \gneq b$ means $a$ is greater than $b$ and it can't be equal to $b$.

The $\gneq$ sign used when we want to emphasis that they can't be eqaul.

for example I can write $x^2 +1 \geq 0$ and it is true because it means $x^2 +1$ is greater than zero or it can be equal to zero. (I hope you remember how the or operator works.)

but it is better to say that $x^2 +1 \gneq 0$ which means $x^2 +1$ is greater than zero and it can't be zero.

  • 0
    "good try" -??? That sounds diminutive. iyengar, there's no difference.2011-12-08
  • 0
    yes we can write $x^2+1 \gt 0$ but when we write $x^2+1 \gneq 0$ we emphasis that it can't be zero. I mean the point is emphasizing because I've seen this sign when it was necessary to not be equal. For example when the statement is in the denominator of a fraction and we want to emphasis that it can't be zero. And Thanks for the +1!2011-12-08
  • 0
    @Bardia : Very nice answer !! , convinced with it, why can't you include the same application of fractions in your answer2011-12-08
  • 0
    @TheChaz : dimunitive ? , I never know the person before, but just wanted to tell so, but if you mind keeping that I better delete it2011-12-08
  • 0
    @iyengar: fair enough! I should have included that example too.2011-12-08
  • 0
    @Bardia : do it now ! , nice example, I was waiting for such practical application, really practical situation to contrast their usage, I searched in google for much time, but didn't found any such examples or situations.2011-12-08