Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

compart.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 308 posts

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#181

Post by dataflow »

red_trumpet wrote: post #120
orlp wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right I should've used "as a symbol" not "as the symbol". It's not terribly common.

Now that I think about it, most double stroked characters really represent "concrete" objects, not generic ones. Like ℙ for projective space, or 𝔸 for affine space. Also 𝔽 is often used together with an index 𝔽_q for the field with q elements. On the other hand, Wikipedia[1] agrees with you, that 𝕏 is "occasionally" used for metric spaces. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackboard_bold

I've seen ℙ used for probability.

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#182

Post by [deleted] »

dietrichepp wrote: post #10

This is for math. In Latex, you get these symbols with \mathbb{}. They are most commonly used to represent to represent number sets, like the set of all integers Z (from the German), set of all natural numbers N, set of complex numbers C, set of all real numbers R, rationals Q (for “quotient”), set of quaternions H (named after Hamilton), or an unknown set F (for “field”). This explains why many of the letters in thi…

[deleted]

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#183

Post by dataflow »

dietrichepp wrote: post #161
enriquto wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here you have the whole history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackboard_bold Summary: boldface came first, in print, and was widely used. Much later, some mathematicians started to write blackboard bold on blackboards (because actual bold would be very untoward to write on a blackboard). Then, the usage was backported to print. I find it ugly, a sort of breaking "suspension of disbelief", I don't know how to explai…

It sounds similar to the division between “math” and “maths”. It looks wrong depending on where you grew up.

We can compromise by switching to mathematic.

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#184

Post by tehbeard »

PaulHoule wrote: post #151
sebzim4500 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think almost everybody thought renaming Facebook to Meta was a bad idea Do they? Why? I don't see how it did any harm, and people are way more willing to admit an association with Meta than with Facebook.

When it first happened I thought they were trying to evade Facebook’s bad reputation for privacy and politics and made a point to keep calling it Facebook. After about a year “Meta” had the same stink of death around it as NFTs and I figured I’d be doing it no favor by calling it by its preferred name.

I thought 'Meta' was the same shuffle Google did with 'Alphabet', some of financial / legal shenanigans..

Though speaking of while trawling the wiki page on Alphabet....

> X (formerly Google X) is an American semi-secret research and development facility and organization founded by Google in January 2010.

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#185

Post by simplicio »

dietrichepp wrote: post #38
masukomi wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because elon renamed twitter to "x corp", bought the x.com domain and shoved this character on it.

The bird is a lot more recognizable, no? Maybe even beautiful?

Also people less likely to assume its the brand for a pornography site? Feel like people have developed a habit of avoiding (or seeking out) anything with a prominent "X" in the name on the Internets.

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#186

Post by enriquto »

catiopatio wrote: post #180
enriquto wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe because my favorite math books do not use this convention, but another equally valid and useful convention: regular boldface.

The point isn’t to be “right” — whatever you define that as. The point is to be understood. Use blackboard bold when it’s what people are most familiar with and will engender the least confusion. You call this the “tabs vs spaces” debate, but I’ve literally never heard anyone advocate your position until you did, just now.

> I’ve literally never heard anyone advocate your position until you did, just now

Many mathematicians concerned by typography use real boldface. For example: Terence Tao's blog, Donald Knuth, Paul Halmos (author of "how to write mathematics"), and the famous journal "Publications Mathématiques de l'IHÉS" which is the undisputed gold standard in mathematical typography. They use real boldface for the number sets N, Z, Q, T, R, C.

I've never seen a boldface R to mean a set different than the real numbers.

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#188

Post by simplicio »

marmitesmuggler wrote: post #6

Strongly reminds me of the X11 logo (one of my favourite designs).

Yea, kinda feels like X.org would have a decent trademark case if they wanted to pursue it. Both the name and logo are really similar, and it seems like both companies are operating in similar enough categories that its not too hard to imagine there being confusion between the two.

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#189

Post by spiffytech »

jjgreen wrote: post #114

Interesting comment on the Register (by Jedit): However, it's also exactly identical to Unicode character 1D54F - because that's all it is. And if you examine the full "X" logo in detail, you'll notice that the scratch in the background doesn't reach the X because all the logo creator did was put U+1D54F in a black square and slap it onto the backdrop. It's the epitome of laziness. https://forums.theregister.com/foru…

Fun fact: this has happened before!

> Apple's adaptation of the [⌘] symbol — encoded in Unicode at U+2318 — was derived in part from its use in Nordic countries as an indicator of cultural locations and places of interest.

> ...

> She was browsing through a symbol dictionary when she came across the cloverleaf-like symbol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command_key

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#190

Post by dietrichepp »

dataflow wrote: post #183
dietrichepp wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds similar to the division between “math” and “maths”. It looks wrong depending on where you grew up.

We can compromise by switching to mathematic.

I’m very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical.
Post reply on HN