Equal (math)

In mathematics, equality is a relationship between two quantities or expressions, stating that they have the same value, or represent the same mathematical object. Equality between A and B is written A = B, and pronounced "A equals B". In this equality, A and B are distinguished by calling them left-hand side (LHS), and right-hand side (RHS). Two objects that are not equal are said to be "distinct".

The equals sign, used to represent equality symbolically in an equation

Equality is often considered a kind of primitive notion, meaning, it is not formally defined, but rather informally said to be "a relation each thing bears to itself and nothing else". This characterization is notably circular ("nothing else"). This makes equality a somewhat slippery idea to pin down.

Basic properties about equality like reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity have been understood intuitively since at least the ancient Greeks, but weren't symbolically stated as general properties of relations until the late 19th century by Giuseppe Peano. Other properties like substitution and function application weren't formally stated until the development of symbolic logic.

There are generally two ways that equality is formalized in mathematics: through logic or through set theory. In logic, equality is a primitive predicate (a statement that may have free variables) with the reflexive property (called the Law of identity), and the substitution property. From those, one can derive the rest of the properties usually needed for equality. Logic also defines the principle of extensionality, which defines two objects of a certain kind to be equal if they satisfy the same external property (See the example of sets below).

After the foundational crisis in mathematics at the turn of the 20th century, set theory (specifically Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory) became the most common foundation of mathematics in order to resolve the crisis. In set theory, any two sets are defined to be equal if they have all the same members. This is called the Axiom of extensionality. Usually set theory is defined within logic, and therefore uses the equality described above, however, if a logic system does not have equality, it is possible to define equality within set theory.

Etymology

The first use of an equals sign, equivalent to ${\displaystyle 14x+15=71}$ in modern notation. From The Whetstone of Witte (1557) by Robert Recorde.

Recorde's introduction of =. "And to avoid the tedious repetition of these words: "is equal to" I will set as I do often in work use, a pair of parallels, or twin lines of one [the same] length, thus: ==, because no 2 things can be more equal."

In English, the word equal is derived from the Latin aequālis ('like', 'comparable', 'similar'), which itself stems from aequus ('level', 'just'). The word entered Middle English around the 14th century, borrowed from Old French equalité (modern égalité). More generally, the interlingual synonyms of equal have been used more broadly throughout history (see § Geometry).

Before the 16th century, there was no common symbol for equality, and equality was usually expressed with a word, such as aequales, aequantur, esgale, faciunt, ghelijck, or gleich, and sometimes by the abbreviated form aeq, or simply ⟨æ⟩ and ⟨œ⟩.Diophantus's use of ⟨ἴσ⟩, short for ἴσος (ísos 'equals'), in Arithmetica (c. 250 AD) is considered one of the first uses of an equals sign.

The sign =, now universally accepted in mathematics for equality, was first recorded by Welsh mathematician Robert Recorde in The Whetstone of Witte (1557). The original form of the symbol was much wider than the present form. In his book, Recorde explains his symbol as "Gemowe lines", from the Latin gemellus ('twin'), using two parallel lines to represent equality because he believed that "no two things could be more equal."

Recorde's symbol was not immediately popular. After its introduction, it wasn't used again in print until 1618 (61 years later), in an anonymous Appendix in Edward Wright's English translation of Descriptio, by John Napier. It wasn't until 1631 that it received more than general recognition in England, being adopted as the symbol for equality in a few influential works. Later used by several influential mathematicians, most notably, both Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibnitz, and due to the prevalence of calculus at the time, it quickly spread throughout the rest of Europe.

Basic properties

Reflexivity

For every a, one has a = a.

Symmetry

For every a and b, if a = b, then b = a.

Transitivity

For every a, b, and c, if a = b and b = c, then a = c.

Substitution

Informally, this just means that if a = b, then a can replace b in any mathematical expression or formula without changing its meaning. (For a formal explanation, see § Axioms) For example:

• Given real numbers a and b, if a = b, then ${\displaystyle a>0}$ implies ${\displaystyle b>0}$.

Operation application

For every a and b, with some operation ${\displaystyle f(x)}$, if a = b, then ${\displaystyle f(a)=f(b)}$. For example:

• Given integers a and b, if a = b, then ${\displaystyle 3a+1=3b+1}$. (Here, ${\displaystyle f(x)=3x+1}$, a unary operation.)
• Given natural numbers a, b, c, and d, if ${\displaystyle a^{2}=2b^{2}}$ and ${\displaystyle c=d\neq 0}$, then ${\displaystyle a^{2}/c=2b^{2}/d}$. (Here, ${\displaystyle f(x,y)=x/y}$, a binary operation.)
• Given real functions ⁠${\displaystyle g}$⁠ and ⁠${\displaystyle h}$⁠ over some variable a, if ${\displaystyle g(a)=h(a)}$ for all a, then ${\textstyle {\frac {d}{da}}g(a)={\frac {d}{da}}h(a)}$ for all a. (Here, ${\textstyle f(x)={\frac {dx}{da}}}$. An operation over functions (i.e. an operator), called the derivative).

The first three properties are generally attributed to Giuseppe Peano for being the first to explicitly state these as fundamental properties of equality in his Arithmetices principia (1889). However, the basic notions have always existed; for example, in Euclid's Elements (c. 300 BC), he includes 'common notions': "Things that are equal to the same thing are also equal to one another" (transitivity), "Things that coincide with one another are equal to one another" (reflexivity), along with some operation-application properties for addition and subtraction. The operation-application property was also stated in Peano's Arithmetices principia, however, it had been common practice in algebra since at least Diophantus (c. 250 AD). The substitution property is generally attributed to Gottfried Leibniz (c. 1686), and often called Leibniz Law.

Equations

An equation is a symbolic equality of two mathematical expressions connected with an equals sign (=). Algebra is the branch of mathematics concerned with equation solving: the problem of finding values of some variable, called unknown, for which the specified equality is true. Each value of the unknown for which the equation holds is called a solution of the given equation; also stated as satisfying the equation. For example, the equation ${\displaystyle x^{2}-6x+5=0}$ has the values ${\displaystyle x=1}$ and ${\displaystyle x=5}$ as its only solutions. The terminology is used similarly for equations with several unknowns. The set of solutions to an equation or system of equations is called its solution set. For example, the set of all solution pairs ${\displaystyle (x,y)}$ of the equation ${\displaystyle x^{2}+y^{2}=1}$ forms the unit circle in analytic geometry; therefore, this equation is called the equation of the unit circle.

In mathematical logic and computer science, an equation may described as a binary formula or Boolean-valued expression, which may be true for some values of the variables (if any) and false for other values. More specifically, an equation represents a binary relation (i.e., a two-argument predicate) which may produce a truth value (true or false) from its arguments. In computer programming, the computation from the two expressions is known as comparison.

Identities

An identity is an equality that is true for all values of its variables in a given domain. An "equation" may sometimes mean an identity, but more often than not, it specifies a subset of the variable space to be the subset where the equation is true. An example is ${\displaystyle \left(x+1\right)\left(x+1\right)=x^{2}+2x+1}$, which is true for each real number ${\displaystyle x}$. There is no standard notation that distinguishes an equation from an identity, or other use of the equality relation: one has to guess an appropriate interpretation from the semantics of expressions and the context. Sometimes, but not always, an identity is written with a triple bar: ${\displaystyle \left(x+1\right)\left(x+1\right)\equiv x^{2}+2x+1.}$ This notation was introduced by Bernhard Riemann in his 1857 Elliptische Funktionen lectures (published in 1899).

Alternatively, identities may be viewed as an equality of functions, where instead of writing ${\displaystyle f(a)=g(a){\text{ for all }}a}$, one may simply write ${\displaystyle f=g}$. This is called the extensionality of functions. Viewed like this, the operation-application property still applies, but here, the operations are operators on a function space (a function acting on functions) like composition and the derivative, or functionals like function evaluation or the integral.

Definitions

Equations are often used to introduce new terms or symbols for constants, assert equalities, and introduce shorthand for complex expressions, which is called "equal by definition", and often denoted with (${\displaystyle :=}$). It is similar to the concept of assignment of a variable in computer science. For example, ${\textstyle \mathbb {e} :=\sum _{n=0}^{\infty }{\frac {1}{n!}}}$ defines Euler's number, and ${\displaystyle i^{2}=-1}$ is the defining property of the imaginary number ${\displaystyle i}$.

In mathematical logic, this is called an extension by definition (by equality) which is a conservative extension to a formal system. This is done by taking the equation defining the new constant symbol as a new axiom of the theory. The first recorded symbolic use of "Equal by definition" appeared in Logica Matematica (1894) by Cesare Burali-Forti, an Italian mathematician. Burali-Forti, in his book, used the notation (${\displaystyle =_{\text{Def}}}$).

In logic

History

Roman copy in marble of a Greek bronze bust of Aristotle by Lysippos, c. 330 BC, with modern alabaster mantle

Equality is often considered a primitive notion, informally said to be "a relation each thing bears to itself and to no other thing". This tradition can be traced back to at least 350 BC by Aristotle: in his Categories, he defines the notion of quantity in terms of a more primitive equality (distinct from identity or similarity), stating:

"The most distinctive mark of quantity is that equality and inequality are predicated of it. Each of the aforesaid quantities is said to be equal or unequal. For instance, one solid is said to be equal or unequal to another; number, too, and time can have these terms applied to them, indeed can all those kinds of quantity that have been mentioned.
That which is not a quantity can by no means, it would seem, be termed equal or unequal to anything else. One particular disposition or one particular quality, such as whiteness, is by no means compared with another in terms of equality and inequality but rather in terms of similarity. Thus it is the distinctive mark of quantity that it can be called equal and unequal." ― (Translated by E. M. Edghill)

Aristotle had separate categories for quantities (number, length, volume) and qualities (temperature, density, pressure), now called intensive and extensive properties. The Scholastics, particularly Richard Swineshead and other Oxford Calculators in the 14th century, began seriously thinking about kinematics and quantitative treatment of qualities. For example, two flames have the same heat-intensity if they produce the same effect on water (e.g, warming vs boiling). Since two intensities could be shown to be equal, and equality was considered the defining feature of quantities, it meant those intensities were quantifiable.

Around the 19th century, with the growth of modern logic, it became necessary to have a more concrete description of equality. With the rise of predicate logic due to the work of Gottlob Frege, logic shifted from being focused on classes of objects to being property-based. This was followed by a movement for describing mathematics in logical foundations, called logicism. This trend lead to the axiomatization of equality through the law of identity and the substitution property especially in mathematical logic and analytic philosophy.

The precursor to the substitution property of equality was first formulated by Gottfried Leibniz in his Discourse on Metaphysics (1686), stating, roughly, that "No two distinct things can have all properties in common." This has since broken into two principles, the substitution property (if ${\displaystyle x=y}$, then any property of ${\displaystyle x}$ is a property of ${\displaystyle y}$), and its converse, the identity of indiscernibles (if ${\displaystyle x}$ and ${\displaystyle y}$ have all properties in common, then ${\displaystyle x=y}$). Its introduction to logic, and first symbolic formulation is due to Bertrand Russell and Alfred Whitehead in their Principia Mathematica (1910), who claim it follows from their axiom of reducibility, but credit Leibniz for the idea.

Axioms

Gottfried Leibniz, a major contributor to 17th-century mathematics and philosophy of mathematics, and whom the Substitution property of equality is named after.

Law of identity: Stating that each thing is identical with itself, without restriction. That is, for every ${\displaystyle a}$, ${\displaystyle a=a}$. It is the first of the traditional three laws of thought. Stated symbolically as:

${\displaystyle \forall a(a=a)}$

Substitution property: Sometimes referred to as Leibniz's law, generally states that if two things are equal, then any property of one must be a property of the other. It can be stated formally as: for every a and b, and any formula ${\displaystyle \phi (x),}$ (with a free variable x), if ${\displaystyle a=b}$, then ${\displaystyle \phi (a)}$ implies ${\displaystyle \phi (b)}$. Stated symbolically as:

${\displaystyle (a=b)\implies {\bigl [}\phi (a)\Rightarrow \phi (b){\bigr ]}}$

Function application is also sometimes included in the axioms of equality, but isn't necessary as it can be deduced from the other two axioms, and similarly for symmetry and transitivity. (See § Derivations of basic properties) In first-order logic, these are axiom schemas (usually, see below), each of which specify an infinite set of axioms. If a theory has a predicate that satisfies the Law of Identity and Substitution property, it is common to say that it "has equality," or is "a theory with equality."

The use of "equality" here somewhat of a misnomer in that any system with equality can be modeled by a theory without standard identity. Those two axioms are strong enough, however, to be isomorphic to a model with idenitity; that is, if a system has a predicate staisfying those axioms without standard equality, there is a model of that system with standard equality. If, however, one is given that a predicate is true equality, then those properties are enough, since if ${\displaystyle x}$ has all the same properties as ${\displaystyle y}$, and ${\displaystyle x}$ has the property of being equal to ${\displaystyle x}$, then ${\displaystyle y}$ has the property of being equal to ${\displaystyle x}$.

As axioms, one can deduce from the first using universal instantiation, and the from second, given ${\displaystyle a=b}$ and ${\displaystyle \phi (a)}$, by using modus ponens twice. Alternatively, each of these may be included in logic as rules of inference. The first called "equality introduction", and the second "equality elimination" (also called paramodulation), used by some theoretical computer scientists like John Alan Robinson in their work on resolution and automated theorem proving.

Derivations of basic properties

• Reflexivity of Equality: This follows immediately from the Law of Identity.
• Symmetry of Equality: Given ${\displaystyle a=b}$, take the formula ${\displaystyle \phi (x):x=a}$. So we have ${\displaystyle (a=b)\implies ((a=a)\Rightarrow (b=a))}$. Since ${\displaystyle a=b}$ by assumption, and ${\displaystyle a=a}$ by Reflexivity, we have that ${\displaystyle b=a}$.
• Transitivity of Equality: Given ${\displaystyle a=b}$ and ${\displaystyle b=c}$, take the formula ${\displaystyle \phi (x):x=c}$. So we have ${\displaystyle (b=a)\implies ((b=c)\Rightarrow (a=c))}$. Since ${\displaystyle b=a}$ by symmetry, and ${\displaystyle b=c}$ by assumption, we have that ${\displaystyle a=c}$.
• Function application: Given some function ${\displaystyle f(x)}$, assume there are elements a and b from its domain such that a = b, then take the formula ${\displaystyle \phi (x):f(a)=f(x)}$. So we have
  ${\displaystyle (a=b)\implies [(f(a)=f(a))\Rightarrow (f(a)=f(b))]}$
  Since ${\displaystyle a=b}$ by assumption, and ${\displaystyle f(a)=f(a)}$ by reflexivity, we have that ${\displaystyle f(a)=f(b)}$.

In set theory

Two sets of polygons in Euler diagrams. These sets are equal since both have the same elements, even though the arrangement differs.

Set theory is the branch of mathematics that studies sets, which can be informally described as "collections of objects." Although objects of any kind can be collected into a set, set theory – as a branch of mathematics – is mostly concerned with those that are relevant to mathematics as a whole. Sets are uniquely characterized by their elements; this means that two sets that have precisely the same elements are equal (they are the same set). In a formalized set theory, this is usually defined by an axiom called the Axiom of extensionality.

For example, using set builder notation,

${\displaystyle \{x\in \mathbb {Z} \mid 0<x\leq 3\}=\{1,2,3\},}$

Which states that "The set of all integers greater than 0 but not more than 3 is equal to the set containing only 1, 2, and 3", despite the differences in notation.

credits Richard Dedekind for being the first to explicitly state the principle, (although he does not assert it as a definition):

"It very frequently happens that different things a, b, c... considered for any reason under a common point of view, are collected together in the mind, and one then says that they form a system S; one calls the things a, b, c... the elements of the system S, they are contained in S; conversely, S consists of these elements. Such a system S (or a collection, a manifold, a totality), as an object of our thought, is likewise a thing; it is completely determined when, for every thing, it is determined whether it is an element of S or not." ― Richard Dedekind, 1888 (Translated by José Ferreirós)

Background

Ernst Zermelo, a contributor to modern Set theory, was the first to explicitly formalize set equality in his Zermelo set theory (now obsolete), by his Axiom der Bestimmtheit.

Around the turn of the 20th century, mathematics faced several paradoxes and counter-intuitive results. For example, Russell's paradox showed a contradiction of naive set theory, it was shown that the parallel postulate cannot be proved, the existence of mathematical objects that cannot be computed or explicitly described, and the existence of theorems of arithmetic that cannot be proved with Peano arithmetic. The result was a foundational crisis of mathematics.

The resolution of this crisis involved the rise of a new mathematical discipline called mathematical logic, which studies formal logic within mathematics. Subsequent discoveries in the 20th century then stabilized the foundations of mathematics into a coherent framework valid for all mathematics. This framework is based on a systematic use of axiomatic method and on set theory, specifically Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory, developed by Ernst Zermelo and Abraham Fraenkel. This set theory (and set theory in general) is now considered the most common foundation of mathematics.

Set equality based on first-order logic with equality

In first-order logic with equality (See § Axioms), the axiom of extensionality states that two sets that contain the same elements are the same set.

• Logic axiom: ${\displaystyle x=y\implies \forall z,(z\in x\iff z\in y)}$
• Logic axiom: ${\displaystyle x=y\implies \forall z,(x\in z\iff y\in z)}$
• Set theory axiom: ${\displaystyle (\forall z,(z\in x\iff z\in y))\implies x=y}$

The first two are given by the substitution property of equality from first-order logic; the last is a new axiom of the theory. Incorporating half of the work into the first-order logic may be regarded as a mere matter of convenience, as noted by Azriel Lévy.

"The reason why we take up first-order predicate calculus with equality is a matter of convenience; by this, we save the labor of defining equality and proving all its properties; this burden is now assumed by the logic."

Set equality based on first-order logic without equality

In first-order logic without equality, two sets are defined to be equal if they contain the same elements. Then the axiom of extensionality states that two equal sets are contained in the same sets.

• Set theory definition: ${\displaystyle (x=y)\ :=\ \forall z,(z\in x\iff z\in y)}$
• Set theory axiom: ${\displaystyle x=y\implies \forall z,(x\in z\iff y\in z)}$

Or, equivalently, one may choose to define equality in a way that mimics, the substitution property explicitly, as the conjunction of all atomic formuals:

• Set theory definition: ${\displaystyle (x=y):=}$${\displaystyle \;\forall z(z\in x\implies z\in y)\,\land \,}$${\displaystyle \forall w(x\in w\implies y\in w)}$
• Set theory axiom: ${\displaystyle (\forall z,(z\in x\iff z\in y))\implies x=y}$

In either case, the Axiom of Extensionality based on first-order logic without equality states:

• ${\displaystyle \forall z(z\in x\Rightarrow z\in y)\implies \forall w(x\in w\Rightarrow y\in w)}$

Proof of basic properties

• Reflexivity: Given a set ${\displaystyle X}$, assume ${\displaystyle z\in X}$, it follows trivially that ${\displaystyle z\in X}$, and the same follows in reverse, therefore ${\displaystyle \forall z,(z\in X\iff z\in X)}$ , thus ${\displaystyle X=X}$.
• Symmetry: Given sets ${\displaystyle X,Y}$, such that ${\displaystyle X=Y}$, then ${\displaystyle \forall z,(z\in X\iff z\in Y)}$, which implies ${\displaystyle \forall z,(z\in Y\iff z\in X)}$, thus ${\displaystyle Y=X}$.
• Transitivity: Given sets ${\displaystyle X,Y,Z}$, such that (1) ${\displaystyle X=Y}$ and (2) ${\displaystyle Y=Z}$, assume ${\displaystyle z\in X}$, then ${\displaystyle z\in Y}$ by (1), which implies ${\displaystyle z\in Z}$ by (2), and similarly for the reverse, therefore ${\displaystyle \forall z,(z\in X\iff z\in Z)}$, thus ${\displaystyle X=Z}$.
• Function application: Given ${\displaystyle a=b}$ and ${\displaystyle f(a)=c}$, then ${\displaystyle (a,c)\in f}$. Since ${\displaystyle a=b}$ and ${\displaystyle c=c}$, then ${\displaystyle (a,c)=(b,c)}$. This is the defining property of an ordered pair. Since ${\displaystyle (a,c)=(b,c),}$ by the Axiom of Extensionality, they must belong to the same sets, so, since ${\displaystyle (a,c)\in f,}$ we have ${\displaystyle (b,c)\in f,}$ or ${\displaystyle f(b)=c.}$ Thus ${\displaystyle f(a)=f(b).}$

Similar relations

Approximate equality

The sequence given by the perimeters of regular n-sided polygons that circumscribe the unit circle approximates ${\displaystyle 2\pi }$

Numerical approximation is the study of algorithms that use numerical approximation (as opposed to symbolic manipulations) for the problems of mathematical analysis.

Calculations are likely to involve rounding errors and other approximation errors. Log tables, slide rules, and calculators produce approximate answers to all but the simplest calculations. The results of computer calculations are normally an approximation, expressed in a limited number of significant digits, although they can be programmed to produce more precise results.

If viewed as a binary relation, (denoted by the symbol ${\displaystyle \approx }$) between real numbers or other things, if precisely defined, is not an equivalence relation since it's not transitive, even if modeled as a fuzzy relation.

In computer science, equality is given by some relational operator. Real numbers are often approximated by floating-point numbers (A sequence of some fixed number of digits of a given base, scaled by an integer exponent of that base), thus it is common to store an expression that denotes the real number as to not lose precision. However, the equality of two real numbers given by an expression is known to be undecidable (specifically, real numbers defined by expressions involving the integers, the basic arithmetic operations, the logarithm and the exponential function). In other words, there cannot exist any algorithm for deciding such an equality (see Richardson's theorem).

Equivalence relation

Graph of an example equivalence with 7 classes

An equivalence relation is a mathematical relation that generalizes the idea of similarity or sameness. It is defined on a set ${\displaystyle X}$ as a binary relation ${\displaystyle \sim }$ that satisfies the three properties: reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity. Reflexivity means that every element in ${\displaystyle X}$ is equivalent to itself (${\displaystyle a\sim a}$ for all ${\displaystyle a\in X}$). Symmetry requires that if one element is equivalent to another, the reverse also holds (${\displaystyle a\sim b\implies b\sim a}$). Transitivity ensures that if one element is equivalent to a second, and the second to a third, then the first is equivalent to the third (${\displaystyle a\sim b}$ and ${\displaystyle b\sim c\implies a\sim c}$). These properties are enough to partition a set into disjoint equivalence classes. Conversely, every partition defines an equivalence class.

The equivalence relation of equality is a special case, as, if restricted to a given set ${\displaystyle S}$, it is the strictest possible equivalence relation on ${\displaystyle S}$; specifically, equality partitions a set into equivalence classes consisting of all singleton sets. Other equivalence relations, since they're less restrictive, generalize equality by identifying elements based on shared properties or transformations, such as congruence in modular arithmetic or similarity in geometry.

Congruence relation

In abstract algebra, a congruence relation extends the idea of an equivalence relation to include the operation-application property. That is, given a set ${\displaystyle X}$, and a set of operations on ${\displaystyle X}$, then a congruence relation ${\displaystyle \sim }$ has the property that ${\displaystyle a\sim b\implies f(a)\sim f(b)}$ for all operations ${\displaystyle f}$ (here, written as unary to avoid cumbersome notation, but ${\displaystyle f}$ may be of any arity). A congruence relation on an algebraic structure such as a group, ring, or module is an equivalence relation that respects the operations defined on that structure.

Isomorphism

In mathematics, especially in abstract algebra and category theory, it is common to deal with objects that already have some internal structure. An isomorphism describes a kind of structure-preserving correspondence between two objects, establishing them as essentially identical in their structure or properties.

More formally, an isomorphism is a bijective mapping (or morphism) ${\displaystyle f}$ between two sets or structures ${\displaystyle A}$ and ${\displaystyle B}$ such that ${\displaystyle f}$ and its inverse ${\displaystyle f^{-1}}$ preserve the operations, relations, or functions defined on those structures. This means that any operation or relation valid in ${\displaystyle A}$ corresponds precisely to the operation or relation in ${\displaystyle B}$ under the mapping. For example, in group theory, a group isomorphism ${\displaystyle f:G\mapsto H}$ satisfies ${\displaystyle f(a*b)=f(a)*f(b)}$ for all elements ${\displaystyle a,b}$, where ${\displaystyle *}$ denotes the group operation.

When two objects or systems are isomorphic, they are considered indistinguishable in terms of their internal structure, even though their elements or representations may differ. For instance, all cyclic groups of order ${\displaystyle \infty }$ are isomorphic to the integers, ${\displaystyle \mathbb {Z} }$, with addition. Similarly, in linear algebra, two vector spaces are isomorphic if they have the same dimension, as there exists a linear bijection between their elements.

The concept of isomorphism extends to numerous branches of mathematics, including graph theory (graph isomorphism), topology (homeomorphism), and algebra (group and ring isomorpisms), among others. Isomorphisms facilitate the classification of mathematical entities and enable the transfer of results and techniques between similar systems. Bridging the gap between isomorphism and equality was one motivation for the development of category theory, as well as for homotopy type theory and univalent foundations.

Geometry

The two triangles on the left are congruent. The third is similar to them. The last triangle is neither congruent nor similar to any of the others.

In geometry, formally, two figures are equal if they contain exactly the same points. However, historically, geometric-equality has always been taken to be much broader. Euclid and Archimedes used "equal" (ἴσος isos) often referring to figures with the same area or those that could be cut and rearranged to form one another. For example, Euclid stated the Pythagorean theorem as “the square on the hypotenuse is equal to the squares on the sides, taken together”; and Archimedes said that “a circle is equal to the rectangle whose sides are the radius and half the circumference.”

This notion persisted until Adrien-Marie Legendre, who introduced the term "equivalent" to describe figures of equal area and restricted "equal" to what we now call “congruent”—the same shape and size, or if one has the same shape and size as the mirror image of the other. Euclid's terminology continued in the work of David Hilbert in his Grundlagen der Geometrie, who further refined Euclid's ideas by introducing the notions of polygons being "divisibly equal" (zerlegungsgleich) if they can be cut into finitely many triangles which are congruent, and "equal in content" (inhaltsgleichheit) if one can add finitely many divisibly equal polygons to each such that the resulting polygons are divisibly equal.

After the rise of set theory, around the 1960s, there was a push for a reform in mathematics education called New Math, following Andrey Kolmogorov, who, in an effort to restructure Russian geometry courses, proposed presenting geometry through the lens of transformations and set theory. Since a figure was seen as a set of points, it could only be equal to itself, as a result of Kolmogorov, the term "congruent" became standard in schools for figures that were previously called "equal", which popularized the term.

While Euclid addressed proportionality and figures of the same shape, it wasn’t until the 17th century that the concept of similarity was formalized in the modern sense. Similar figures are those that have the same shape but can differ in size; they can be transformed into one another by scaling and congruence. Later a concept of equality of directed line segments, equipollence, was advanced by Giusto Bellavitis in 1835.

See also

• Glossary of mathematical symbols § Equality, equivalence and similarity
• Homotopy type theory
• Identity type
• Inequality
• Logical equality
• Logical equivalence
• Proportionality (mathematics)
• Relational operator § Equality
• Theory of pure equality

Notes

1. 𝒇 can have any arity, but is written as unary to avoid cumbersome notation.
2. Assuming g and h are differentiable.

References

Citations

1. "Equality (n.), sense 3". Oxford English Dictionary. 2023. doi:10.1093/OED/1127700997. A relation between two quantities or other mathematical expressions stating that the two are the same; (also) an expression of such a relation by means of symbols, an equation.
2. Rosser 2008, p. 163.
3. Bird, John (16 April 2014). Engineering Mathematics, 7th ed. Routledge. p. 65. ISBN 978-1-317-93789-0.
4. Clapham, Christopher; Nicholson, James (2009). "distinct". The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Mathematics. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-923594-0. Retrieved 13 January 2025.
5. Recorde, Robert (1557). The Whetstone of Witte. London: Jhon Kyngstone. p. 3 of "The rule of equation, commonly called Algebers Rule". OL 17888956W.
6. "Equal". Merriam-Webster. Archived from the original on 15 September 2020. Retrieved 9 August 2020.
7. "Equality". Etymonline. Retrieved 16 December 2024.
8. O'Connor, J. J.; Robertson, E. F. (2002). "Robert Recorde". MacTutor History of Mathematics Archive. Archived from the original on 29 November 2013. Retrieved 19 October 2013.
9. Derbyshire, John (2006). Unknown Quantity: A Real And Imaginary History of Algebra. Joseph Henry Press. p. 35. ISBN 0-309-09657-X.
10. Cajori 1928, p. 298–305.
11. Beckenbach, Edwin F. (1982). College Algebra. California: Wadsworth. p. 7. ISBN 978-0-534-01007-2.
12. Landin, Joseph (1989). An Introduction to Algebraic Structures. New York : Dover. p. 5. ISBN 978-0-486-65940-4.
13. Suppes, Patrick (1957). Introduction to Logic (PDF). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. pp. 101–102. LCCN 57-8153.
14. Tao, Terence (2022). "Analysis I". Texts and Readings in Mathematics. 37: 284. doi:10.1007/978-981-19-7261-4. ISBN 978-981-19-7261-4. ISSN 2366-8717.
15. Grishin, V. N. "Equality axioms". Encyclopedia of Mathematics. Springer-Verlag. ISBN 1402006098.
16. Peano, Giuseppe (1889). Arithmetices principia: nova methodo (in Latin). Fratres Bocca. p. XIII.
17. Stebbing 1930, pp. 168–169.
18. Heath, Thomas L. (1956). The Thirteen Books of Euclid's Elements. Vol. 1 (Books I and II) (2nd ed.). New York: Dover Publications. p. 222. ISBN 0-486-60088-2.
19. Heath, Thomas Little (1910). Diophantus of Alexandria: A Study in the History of Greek algebra. London: Cambridge University Press.
20. Forrest, Peter (2024). Zalta, Edward N.; Nodelman, Uri (eds.). "The Identity of Indiscernibles". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2024 ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved 4 March 2025.
21. Sobolev, S.K. (originator). "Equation". Encyclopedia of Mathematics. Springer. ISBN 1402006098.
22. "Definition of SOLUTION SET". www.merriam-webster.com. 24 February 2025. Retrieved 1 March 2025.
23. "Unit Circle - Equation of a Unit Circle | Unit Circle Chart". Cuemath. Retrieved 1 March 2025.
24. Levin, Oscar (2021). Discrete Mathematics: An Open Introduction (PDF). p. 5. ISBN 978-1792901690.
25. Hogarth, Margaret (1 January 2012). Hogarth, Margaret (ed.). "14 - Access – combining data". Data Clean-Up and Management. Chandos Information Professional Series. Chandos Publishing. pp. 343–385. doi:10.1016/b978-1-84334-672-2.50014-7. ISBN 978-1-84334-672-2. Retrieved 20 January 2025.
26. Equation. Springer Encyclopedia of Mathematics. URL: http://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=Equation&oldid=32613
27. Henry Sinclair Hall, Samuel Ratcliffe Knight. Algebra for Beginners, 1895, p. 52
28. Marcus, Solomon; Watt, Stephen M. "What is an Equation?". Section V. Types of Equations and Terminology in Various Languages. Retrieved 27 February 2019.
29. Clapham, Christopher; Nicholson, James (1 January 2009). The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Mathematics. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acref/9780199235940.001.0001. ISBN 978-0-19-923594-0.
30. Cajori 1928, p. 417.
31. Kronecker, Leopold (1978). Vorlesungen über Zahlentheorie. Berlin ; Heidelberg ; New York : Springer. p. 86.
32. Riemann, Bernhard; Stahl, Hermann (1899). Elliptische functionen. Leipzig, B.G. Teubner.
33. Tao, Terence (2022). "Analysis I". Texts and Readings in Mathematics. 37: 42–43. doi:10.1007/978-981-19-7261-4. ISBN 978-981-19-7261-4. ISSN 2366-8717.
34. Pauli, Sebastian. Equality of Functions.
35. "function extensionality in nLab". ncatlab.org. Retrieved 1 March 2025.
36. Lévy 2002, p. 27.
37. Lankham, Isaiah; Nachtergaele, Bruno; Schilling, Anne (21 January 2007). "Some Common Mathematical Symbols and Abbreviations (with History)" (PDF). University of California, Davis.
38. "E | Definition, Value, Constant, Series, & Facts | Britannica". www.britannica.com. Retrieved 13 January 2025.
39. Marecek, Lynn; Mathis, Andrea Honeycutt (6 May 2020). "8.8 Use the Complex Number System - Intermediate Algebra 2e | OpenStax". openstax.org. Retrieved 4 March 2025.
40. Mendelson 1964, p. 82-83.
41. Burali-Forti, Cesare (1894). Logica matematica [Mathematical logic] (in Italian). University of California. Ulrico Hoepli. p. 120. Archived from the original on 1 August 2009.
42. "13.3: Some Common Mathematical Symbols and Abbreviations". Mathematics LibreTexts. 7 November 2013. Retrieved 4 March 2025.
43. Zalabardo, Jose L. (2000). Introduction To The Theory Of Logic. Routledge. ISBN 9780429499678.
44. Edghill, E. M. "The Internet Classics Archive | Categories by Aristotle". classics.mit.edu. Retrieved 23 January 2025.
45. Clagett, Marshall (1950). "Richard Swineshead and Late Medieval Physics: I. The Intension and Remission of Qualities (1)". Osiris. 9: 131–161. doi:10.1086/368527. ISSN 0369-7827. JSTOR 301847.
46. Grant, Edward (1 August 1972). "Nicole Oresme and the medieval geometry of qualities and motions. A treatise on the uniformity and difformity of intensities known as 'tractatus de configurationibus qualitatum et motuum': Marshall Clagett (ed. and tr.), edited with an introduction, English translation and commentary by Marshall Clagett. University of Wisconsin Press: Madison, Milwaukee, 1968; and London, 1969. xiii+713pp. £7.75". Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A. 3 (2): 167–182. Bibcode:1972SHPSA...3..167G. doi:10.1016/0039-3681(72)90022-2. ISSN 0039-3681.
47. Mendelson 1964, p. 75
48. Noonan, Harold; Curtis, Ben (2022). "Identity". In Zalta, Edward N.; Nodelman, Uri (eds.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2022 ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved 11 January 2025.
49. Forrest, Peter, "The Identity of Indiscernibles", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2020 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity-indiscernible/#Form
50. Russell, Bertrand; Whitehead, Alfred (1910). Principia Mathematica. Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press. p. 57. OCLC 729017529.
51. "Laws of thought". The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. Robert Audi, Editor, Cambridge: Cambridge UP. p. 489.
52. "Identity of indiscernibles | Leibniz's Law, Indiscernibility & Philosophy | Britannica". www.britannica.com. Retrieved 12 January 2025.
53. Hodges, Wilfrid (1983). Gabbay, D.; Guenthner, F. (eds.). "Handbook of Philosophical Logic". SpringerLink: 68–72. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-7066-3.
54. Deutsch, Harry; Garbacz, Pawel (2024). "Relative Identity". In Zalta, Edward N.; Nodelman, Uri (eds.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2024 ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved 20 January 2025.
55. Suppes, Patrick (1957). Introduction to Logic (PDF). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. p. 103. LCCN 57-8153.
56. "Introduction to Logic - Equality". logic.stanford.edu. Retrieved 1 March 2025.
57. Nieuwenhuis, Robert; Rubio, Alberto (2001). "7. Paramodulation-Based Theorem Proving" (PDF). In Robinson, Alan J.A.; Voronkov, Andrei (eds.). Handbook of Automated Reasoning. Elsevier. pp. 371–444. ISBN 978-0-08-053279-0.
58. Mendelson 1964, pp. 93–95.
59. Breuer, Josef (1958). Introduction to the Theory of Sets. Internet Archive. Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall. p. 4. A set is a collection of definite distinct objects of our perception or of our thought, which are called elements of the set.
60. Stoll 1963, p. 4-5.
61. Lévy 2002, pp. 13, 358. Mac Lane & Birkhoff 1999, p. 2. Mendelson 1964, p. 5.
62. Ferreirós 2007, p. 226.
63. Zermelo, Ernst (1908). "Untersuchungen über die Grundlagen der Mengenlehre I". Mathematische Annalen. 65 (2): 261–281. doi:10.1007/bf01449999. S2CID 120085563.
64. Ferreirós 2007, p. 299.
65. Ferreirós 2007, p. 366, "[...] the most common axiom system was and is called the Zermelo-Fraenkel system."
66. Kleene 2002, p. 189. Lévy 2002, p. 13. Shoenfield 2001, p. 239.
67. Lévy 2002, p. 4.
68. Mendelson 1964, pp. 159–161.Rosser 2008, pp. 211–213
69. Fraenkel, Abraham Adolf (1973). Foundations of set theory. Vol. 67 (2nd Revised ed.). Amsterdam: Noord-Holland Publishing Company. p. 27. ISBN 978-0-7204-2270-2. OCLC 731740381.
70. Stoll 1963, p. 24.
71. "Numerical Computation Guide". Archived from the original on 6 April 2016. Retrieved 16 June 2013.
72. Kerre, Etienne E.; De Cock, Martine (2001). "Approximate Equality is no Fuzzy Equality" (PDF).
73. Stoll 1963, p. 29.
74. Stoll 1963, p. 31.
75. Hungerford, Thomas W. (1974). "Algebra". Graduate Texts in Mathematics. 73. doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-6101-8. ISBN 978-1-4612-6103-2. ISSN 0072-5285.
76. "Isomorphism | Group Theory, Algebraic Structures, Equivalence Relations | Britannica". www.britannica.com. 25 November 2024. Retrieved 12 January 2025.
77. Leinster, Tom (30 December 2016). Basic Category Theory. arXiv. p. 12. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1612.09375. arXiv:1612.09375. Retrieved 4 March 2025.
78. Pinter, Charles C. (2010). A Book of Abstract Algebra. Internet Archive. Mineola, N.Y. : Dover Publications. p. 94. ISBN 978-0-486-47417-5.
79. Pinter, Charles C. (2010). A Book of Abstract Algebra. Internet Archive. Mineola, N.Y. : Dover Publications. p. 114. ISBN 978-0-486-47417-5.
80. Axler, Sheldon. Linear Algebra Done RIght (PDF). Springer. p. 86.
81. Eilenberg, S.; Mac Lane, S. (1942). "Group Extensions and Homology". Annals of Mathematics. 43 (4): 757–831. doi:10.2307/1968966. ISSN 0003-486X. JSTOR 1968966.
82. Marquis, Jean-Pierre (2019). "Category Theory". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Department of Philosophy, Stanford University. Retrieved 26 September 2022.
83. Hofmann, Martin; Streicher, Thomas (1998). "The groupoid interpretation of type theory". In Sambin, Giovanni; Smith, Jan M. (eds.). Twenty Five Years of Constructive Type Theory. Oxford Logic Guides. Vol. 36. Clarendon Press. pp. 83–111. ISBN 978-0-19-158903-4. MR 1686862.
84. Beeson, Michael (1 September 2023). "On the notion of equal figures in Euclid". Beiträge zur Algebra und Geometrie / Contributions to Algebra and Geometry. 64 (3): 581–625. arXiv:2008.12643. doi:10.1007/s13366-022-00649-9. ISSN 2191-0383.
85. Legendre, A. M. (Adrien Marie) (1867). Elements of geometry. Cornell University Library. Baltimore, Kelly & Piet. p. 68.
86. Clapham, C.; Nicholson, J. (2009). "Oxford Concise Dictionary of Mathematics, Congruent Figures" (PDF). Addison-Wesley. p. 167. Archived from the original on 29 October 2013. Retrieved 2 June 2017.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
87. Hilbert, David (1899). Grundlagen der Geometrie. Wellesley College Library. Leipzig, B.G. Teubner. p. 40.
88. Alexander Karp & Bruce R. Vogeli – Russian Mathematics Education: Programs and Practices, Volume 5, pgs. 100–102
89. "2.2.1: Similarity". Mathematics LibreTexts. 10 February 2020. Retrieved 4 March 2025.
90. "Giusto Bellavitis - Biography". Maths History. Retrieved 4 March 2025.

Bibliography

• Kleene, Stephen Cole (2002) [1967]. Mathematical Logic. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications. ISBN 978-0-486-42533-7.
• Lévy, Azriel (2002) [1979]. Basic set theory. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications. ISBN 978-0-486-42079-0.
• Mac Lane, Saunders; Birkhoff, Garrett (1999) [1967]. Algebra (Third ed.). Providence, Rhode Island: American Mathematical Society.
• Mazur, Barry (12 June 2007). When is one thing equal to some other thing? (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 October 2019. Retrieved 13 December 2009.
• Mendelson, Elliott (1964). Introduction to Mathematical Logic. Princeton, N.J.: Van Nostrand. ISBN 978-0-442-05300-0.
• Rosser, John Barkley (2008) [1953]. Logic for mathematicians. Mineola, New York: Dover Publication. ISBN 978-0-486-46898-3. OCLC 227923880.
• Shoenfield, Joseph Robert (2001) [1967]. Mathematical Logic (2nd ed.). A K Peters. ISBN 978-1-56881-135-2.
• Stebbing, L. S. (1930). A Modern Introduction To Logic (3rd ed.). London: Methuen and Co. OCLC 1244466095.
• Ferreirós, José (2007). "Labyrinth of Thought". Birkhäuser Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-3-7643-8350-3. ISBN 978-3-7643-8349-7.
• Cajori, Florian (1928). A History Of Mathematical Notations Vol I. London: The Open Court Company, Publishers.
• Stoll, Robert Roth (1963). Set Theory and Logic. San Francisco : W. H. Freeman. LCCN 63-8995.