# [ACCEPTED]-O-notation, O(∞) = O(1)?-big-o

Infinity is not a number, or at least not 7 a real number, so the expression is malformed. The 6 correct way to express this is to simply 5 state that a program doesn't terminate. Note: *program*, not 4 *algorithm*, as an algorithm is guaranteed to terminate.

(If 3 you wanted, you might be able to define 2 big-O notation on transfinite numbers. I'm 1 not sure if that would be of any use, though.)

Your argument is not quite correct.

Big O 6 notation disregards constant multiples; there's 5 no difference between `O(1)`

and `O(42)`

, or between 4 `O(log(n))`

and `O(3π log(n))`

.

Standard convention is to not use 3 any constant multiples.

However, `O(∞)`

would mean 2 an “algorithm” that *never* terminates, as opposed 1 to `O(1)`

which will terminate at some point.

To answer the question :

O-notation, O(∞) = O(1)?

**No**

The 11 main difference is that O(1) will end at 10 some point, while O(∞) never ends.

They 9 both don't include a variable, but have 8 both different meanings :

`O(1)`

(or O(121) or 7 O(whatever but not infinity) : independendent 6 of the functions arguments, but ending

`O(∞)`

: independendent 5 of the functions arguments, and non ending

As 4 pointed out in another answer, infinity 3 isn't really in the domain of the big-O 2 notation, but the simple 'no' than remains 1 of course, O(1) and O(∞) are not the same.

Big-Oh is a measure of how something the 3 resources required scales as N increases. O(5 2 hours) and O(5 seconds) are both O(1) since 1 no extra resources are needed as N increases.

More Related questions

We use cookies to improve the performance of the site. By staying on our site, you agree to the terms of use of cookies.