Norman Albers Posted September 30, 2007 Share Posted September 30, 2007 Help! How do you compose the vertical line evaluating an integral at limits? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D H Posted October 1, 2007 Share Posted October 1, 2007 Use a left,right pair where the left element is invisible: \left.\frac F G \right|^R_1 [math]\left.\frac F G \right|^R_1[/math] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Albers Posted October 2, 2007 Share Posted October 2, 2007 Thanks, D H, I would not have figured that out. Also, I didn't know you need not give brackets after \frac , as the space delineates the argument change. Correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D H Posted October 2, 2007 Share Posted October 2, 2007 Correct. \frac takes two arguments. You only need to use the brackets if an argument is non-atomic. You don't even need the space if you use brackets. The space exists to separate arguments. It does not print. You can even take advantage of the fact the digits cannot be part of a name and hence separate arguments without a space. For example \frac1a, which displays as [math]\frac1a[/math]. Nontheless it's a good practice to use the braces even when they aren't needed. One problem with the way LaTeX treats spaces is if when you define a macro (in a .tex or .sty file, not here) that prints something. For example suppose you define \mbsp as shorthand for "My Big Software Package version 3.1": \newcommand{\mbsp}{My Big Software Package version 3.1} Now you can brag about a specific version of your big software package with \mbsp: The following capabilities are now available in \mbsb:\begin{itemize}\item Feature 1 ... This will work fine: The following capabilities are now available in My Big Software Package version 3.1: Feature 1 ... Now someone redlines this as passive voice. You change it to \mbsb offers the following capabilities:\begin{itemize}\item Feature 1 ... But this prints as My Big Software Package version 3.1offers the following capabilities: Feature 1 ... There is no space between 3.1 and offers. You need to force the space, for example \mbsb\ offers the following capabilities:\begin{itemize}\item Feature 1 ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Albers Posted October 2, 2007 Share Posted October 2, 2007 D H, Cool and thank you. [bIGTEETH] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honestdude14 Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 (edited) is there a better way to test this or practice than trial and error? [math]c=2\pi*r*\cos\Theta[/math] Edited July 12, 2008 by honestdude14 multiple post merged Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Not really. You can use the Preview Post feature and try it as many times as you'd like though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noob Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 [math]\text{this is a test}[/math] fine, it works Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Air Posted August 20, 2008 Share Posted August 20, 2008 [math]\displaystyle\int_0^{\infty} (Air) \ \mathrm{d}x[/math] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Albers Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 What's the code for complex conjugate, you know, something "star"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timo Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 [math]x^*[/math] ? Just use x^* or x^{*}. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Albers Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 I am working in OpenOffice and this didn't cut it. It's looking for a multiplicand. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedI got into the OpenOffice forum and the answer is: "*" in the superscript. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Albers Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Perhaps more to the point, which symbol is used more these days for c.c., the asterisk or a bar-over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Perhaps more to the point, which symbol is used more these days for c.c., the asterisk or a bar-over? Complex conjugate? I have seen both used, provided the one you pick is not also being used for something else you will be alright. I think bar is in common usage in complex geometry. If you are more of an algebraist you may prefer to use the star as it resembles the adjoint in *-algebras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Albers Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Thanks, ajb. I work in the zone between geometry and algebra, between knowledge and imagination, light and dark. Do not try to adjust your monitor... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Is there any provision for drawing commutative diagrams? Something like Paul Taylor's "diagrams". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 We used to have a [diag] tag that used diagxy for diagrams. I'm not sure why it's no longer available. Perhaps I can hack it back in sometime, unless Dave removed it for a particular reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the tree Posted May 21, 2010 Share Posted May 21, 2010 Only some of the logic notation appears to work: All rendering okay: [imath]\forall p \exists q[/imath], [imath]p \therefore q[/imath], [imath]p=\not q[/imath], [imath]p \neg q[/imath]. Not rendering: [imath]p \and q [/imath], [imath]p \or q [/imath]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted May 21, 2010 Share Posted May 21, 2010 \and and \or aren't symbols in LaTeX. You can use \wedge and \vee though. [math]p \wedge q[/math], [math]p \vee q[/math] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the tree Posted May 21, 2010 Share Posted May 21, 2010 Strange, they appear on the Wikipedia LaTeX guide - maybe they are using an obscure package. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted May 21, 2010 Share Posted May 21, 2010 I think Wikipedia uses a bunch of the AMS packages by default. I could add some to our package list if you find out what we need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shyvera Posted May 21, 2010 Share Posted May 21, 2010 One thing that hasn’t been mentioned in this thread so far is formatting colors in LaTeX. [math]\color{red}{\rm red}[/math] [math]\color{blue}{\rm blue}[/math] [math]\color{green}{\rm green}[/math] [math]\color{yellow}{\rm yellow}[/math] [math]\color{black}{\rm black}[/math] [math]\color{white}{\rm white}[/math] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khaled Posted July 3, 2010 Share Posted July 3, 2010 I have learned LaTeX because in my college i have to write reports and papers in LaTeX, test: [math]|x| = \{ \begin{matrix} \color{red}{-X}&\color{red}{if X<0}\\ \color{blue}{X}&\color{blue}{if X>0}\\ \end{matrix}[/math] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the tree Posted July 9, 2010 Share Posted July 9, 2010 I have learned LaTeX because in my college i have to write reports and papers in LaTeX, test: [math]|x| = \{ \begin{matrix} \color{red}{-X}&\color{red}{if X<0}\\ \color{blue}{X}&\color{blue}{if X>0}\\ \end{matrix}[/math] In that case you might want to use \mbox around plain text such as 'if', and use the \cases notation rather than trying to hack your way around a matrix. [math] f(x) = \begin{cases} \ln(1-x) & \mbox{if} \; x<0 \\ 1 & \mbox{if} \; 0\leq x < c \\ x^2 & \mbox{otherwise} \end{cases} [/math] See how that looks neater both in terms of code and output? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murshid Posted November 8, 2010 Share Posted November 8, 2010 Why doesn't the factorial sign work in LaTex here? for example, [math]\frac{1}{2}[/math] works, but when I use factorial sign after the '2' in the denominator, I get an error message: [math]\frac{1}{2!}[/math] . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now