≈ Do you understand this symbol? (1 Viewer)

[PatTheCat]

I'm just curious to know.
Do you use/understand the international math symbol for “is approximately equal to" "≈"? Especially in context with dimensions.
In Germany we use this a lot. How is the international usage?

for example:
approx. 50 inch
≈ 50 inch

 

[stocky]

I understand it but rarely see it used here.

 

[stocky]

See this more ≠

 

[PatTheCat]

Thanks stocky. You're from Australia, right?

 

[tommythecat]

I use ~ for approximations.

 

[Señor Tony]

Mechanical engineer here, currently living in Australia. I use "≈" as "approximately equal to" fairly regularly in casual work emails and documents. Very rarely for anything formal. I use "≠" as "does not equal" but haven't used it much at all since university.

 

[atomiktoaster]

I use ~ for approximations.

Yeah, ~ is much more common, since there's a key for it on the keyboard. I'd understand the double, but it might look like = to someone in a hurry. Also a mechanical engineer, but I usually use bounded approximations at work, i.e. 40"+, 500 lbs max, $300-$400, etc.

 

[gopherblue]

I always thought ≈ was the international ASCII symbol for "the smell of homemade cookies, fresh out of the oven."


...Hmm...I learn something new everyday on PCF.

 

[stocky]

Thanks stocky. You're from Australia, right?

Yeah mate

 

[tommythecat]

Yeah, ~ is much more common, since there's a key for it on the keyboard. I'd understand the double, but it might look like = to someone in a hurry. Also a mechanical engineer, but I usually use bounded approximations at work, i.e. 40"+, 500 lbs max, $300-$400, etc.

Exactly why I use it...don't have to remember an alt-code.

 

[abby99]

I think it was in a math class that I first encountered ≈ as meaning "is approximately equal to," and I still use it for that purpose, especially in handwritten notes at work (in cursive, of course). On a keyboard, if precision is not necessary, I substitute ~ out of sheer laziness. So, in my little world, ~ is approximately equal to ≈.

 

[bentax1978]

So, in my little world, ~ is approximately equal to ≈

So would you denote that as "~ ≈ ≈" or "~ ~ ≈"

 

[Irish]

I use ≈ fairly often (engineering), though mostly in design calcs. For approximate dimension lengths, ± is used more often on plans.

approx 30'
≈ 30'
30' ±

 

[DJ Mack]

Any of you guys programmers? PHP has the usual operators, = and ==. But due to quirks in the language it was necessary to create a third: === (really, really, really equals). I hated calculus but I thought it was funny that sometimes you'd have to say If and Only If (IFF) X=5 because If X=5 wasn't good enough.

Back on this topic, I use ~ on the keyboard when it's appropriate but when writing by hand I always use the more correct ≈.

Anywho, @PatTheCat, what sparked this particular little curiosity?

 

[Forty4]

I use ~ as approx. However I actually thought when doing it hand written it was = with ~ over the top not the double ~ that I have yet to figure out how to do on the computer.

≈ copy paste works.

 

[atomiktoaster]

I use ≈ fairly often (engineering), though mostly in design calcs. For approximate dimension lengths, ± is used more often on plans.

approx 30'
≈ 30'
30' ±

You use a ± without any tolerance value on plans? Can't say I've ever seen or used it like that. I'd be worried it about confusing it for a missing tolerance, especially because 1.375"±.002" is almost always tighter than 1.375". 1.375"± being looser than 1.375" is odd to me.

 

[Mental Nomad]

~ is used more often when typing because it's on the keyboard, but it's often used as if it were ≈.

The difference is accuracy. ~ is technically a rough estimate, while ≈ should be a close approximation. I believe those are international standards.

 

[Irish]

You use a ± without any tolerance value on plans? Can't say I've ever seen or used it like that. I'd be worried it about confusing it for a missing tolerance, especially because 1.375"±.005" is always tighter than 1.375". 1.375"± being looser than 1.375" is odd to me.

Yes, it's used on plans to call out dimensions that are approximate, usually longer existing dimensions that are difficult to measure precisely due to layout or line of site, or dimensions that aren't necessarily important to be precisely measured, like dimensions of an existing structure that's being completely demolished. Note that this is for heavy construction (I work in the highway & bridge industry), not fabrication of components (those tolerances get much more restrained).

 

[PatTheCat]

Thanks for your feedback so far. Very entertaining.

@DJ Mack I'm looking for a universal solution to change the weight specification to make it internationally understandable, without changing the original layout of the document too much.
Before it said "ca. kg". I'm still not happy about the German word "Typ" for type but I think I will leave it as it is for now.

 

[pltrgyst]

At the US schools I attended, the symbol for "approximately equal" was a tilde above an equals sign, i.e., a three-part symbol.

See http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/57181.html. But the tilde should be much closer to the equals sign...

 

[mummel]

Use this, ~

 

[legend672]

Thanks stocky. You're from Australia, right?

I love Vienna

 

[Chicken Rob]

At the US schools I attended, the symbol for "approximately equal" was a tilde above an equals sign, i.e., a three-part symbol.

See http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/57181.html. But the tilde should be much closer to the equals sign...

I have a BS in math, and I have seen it as @pltrgyst describes it, as described in the original post, and with just a single tilde.

I don't use any of them in my personal work, I report point estimates and standard errors.

 

[MikesDad]

I think it was in a math class that I first encountered ≈ as meaning "is approximately equal to," and I still use it for that purpose, especially in handwritten notes at work (in cursive, of course). On a keyboard, if precision is not necessary, I substitute ~ out of sheer laziness. So, in my little world, ~ is approximately equal to ≈.

this

 

[MikesDad]

At the US schools I attended, the symbol for "approximately equal" was a tilde above an equals sign, i.e., a three-part symbol.

See http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/57181.html. But the tilde should be much closer to the equals sign...

this too

 

[AK Chip]

We use ± for underground utility elevations that the contractor will encounter while excavating by or tying into.

 

[MrBo]

this

As a fellow math teacher, I gotta ask, did you ever take points off for using = instead of ≈ ?

In recent curricula I've only ever seen the = with a tilde over top used in geometry for congruence.

 

[MikesDad]

As a fellow math teacher, I gotta ask, did you ever take points off for using = instead of ≈ ?

In recent curricula I've only ever seen the = with a tilde over top used in geometry for congruence.

Well... don't recall .. that was 40 years ago (OMG... can't believe I just wrote that sentence)

 

[moose]

You use a ± without any tolerance value on plans? Can't say I've ever seen or used it like that. I'd be worried it about confusing it for a missing tolerance, especially because 1.375"±.002" is almost always tighter than 1.375". 1.375"± being looser than 1.375" is odd to me.

This. I'm a mechanical engineer and I've never seen ± used that way. If I ever saw it on a dwg or in a table, the first thing I would do is call them up and say, 'hey what's the tolerance, you left it out'

I would recognize what the double tilde means but as others have mentioned, in Canada you would normally see a single tilde replacing the top line of an equals sign to show approximately equal to. If I saw ca. kg. I wouldn't know WTF that meant.

 

[eXtremum]

I use ~ for approximations.

I've seen this used, more than anything else.