Introducing LaTeX Math Typesetting

[chroot]

Physicsforums.com is proud to introduce the addition of LaTeX mathematical typesetting to our forum software!

LaTeX is a professional-grade general typesetting system that centers around very pleasing mathematical presentation. Mathematical expressions are written in a markup style somewhat similar to HTML.

You may include LaTeX graphics in any post here on physicsforums.com (but not in private messages).

To include a LaTeX graphic, simply include your LaTeX code within the tags [ tex ] [ / tex ] or [ latex ] [ /latex ] (they are equivalent). The real tags do not include spaces.

For example, the code [ tex ] a^x_n [ /tex ] produces the graphic a^x_n.

Note that you can click on any LaTeX image and see a popup containing the code for the image.

A pdf file of the most useful LaTeX commands, symbols, and constructs is provided here:

http://www.physicsforums.com/misc/howtolatex.pdf

More symbol reference:

http://amath.colorado.edu/documentation/LaTeX/Symbols.pdf

A bit more information on the amsmath package is available here:

http://www.cds.caltech.edu/~dunbar/docs/amsldoc.pdf

Below, I'm providing some example graphics demonstrating a variety of techniques. Click on each to view its source code.


\frac{1}{2}



R^a{}_{bcd}



\nabla \times C



\mathbb{RC}


\lambda_j = \vec{\lambda} \cdot \vec{e}_j

\lambda_j = \mathbf{\lambda} \cdot \mathbf{e}_j


v(t) = v_0 + \frac{1}{2} a t^2



\gamma \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}}



\ddot{x} = \frac {d^2x} {dt^2}



\overline{x}
\hat{x}
\check{x}
\tilde{x}
\acute{x}
\grave{x}
\dot{x}
\ddot{x}
\breve{x}
\bar{x}
\vec{x}
\underline{x}



\begin{align*}
ab\\
a b\\
a\! b\\
a\, b\\
a\: b\\
a\; b\\
\end{align*}



\begin{multline*}
a + b + c + d + e + f\\
+g+h+i+j+k+l+m+n
\end{multline*}



\begin{gather*}
a_1 = b_1 + c_1\\
a_2 = b_2 + c_2 - d_2 + e_2
\end{gather*}



e^x = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{x^n}{n!} = \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} (1+x/n)^n



\int_{0}^{1} x dx = \left[ \frac{1}{2}x^2 \right]_{0}^{1} = \frac{1}{2}



L = \int_a^b \left( g_{\it ij} \dot u^i \dot u^j \right)^{1/2} dt



\iiint f(x,y,z)\,dx\,dy\,dz



\lim_{\substack{x\rightarrow 0\\y\rightarrow 0}} f(x,y)



\idotsint_\textrm{paths} \exp{(iS(x,\dot{x})/\hbar)}\, \mathcal{D}x



A \alpha B \beta \Gamma \gamma \Delta \delta \dots \Phi \phi X \chi \Psi \psi \Omega \omega



\Gamma^l_{ki} = \frac{1}{2} g^{lj} (\partial_k g_{ij} + \partial_i g_{jk} - \partial_j g_{ki})



\sigma_{3} = \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0\\
0 & -1
\end{array}
\right)



\begin{align*}
u &= \ln x \quad & dv &= x\,dx \\
du &= \mbox{$\frac{1}{x}\,dx$} & v &= \mbox{$\frac{1}{2} x^2$}
\end{align*}



\newcommand{\pd}[3]{ \frac{ \partial^{#3}{#1} }{ \partial {#2}^{#3} } }

i \hbar \pd{\Psi}{t}{} =
- \frac{\hbar^2}{2 m} \ \pd{\Psi}{x}{2} + V \Psi



\newcommand{\mean}[1]{{<\!\!{#1}\!\!>}}
\newcommand{\braket}[2]{{<\!\!{#1|#2}\!\!>}}
\newcommand{\braketop}[3]{{<\!\!{#1|\hat{#2}|#3}\!\!>}}

\braket{\phi}{\psi} \equiv \int \phi^*(x) \psi(x)\,dx



\begin{array}{l | c|c|c|c |} \ &\overline{A}\,\overline{B}&A\,\overline{B}&\overline{A}\, B&A\, B\\
\hline
\overline{C}&0&1&0&0\\
\hline C&1&0&1&1\\
\hline
\end{array}



\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\tau &= \tau_1+\tau_2 = \sqrt{{\Delta t_1}^2-{\Delta x_1}^2}+
\sqrt{{\Delta t_2}^2-{\Delta x_2}^2} \\
&= \sqrt{(5-0)^2-(4-0)^2}+\sqrt{(10-5)^2-(0-4)^2}\\
&= 3+3 = 6
\end{split}
\end{equation*}


Whenever you want to include a graphic on the same line with your text, like C H_4 or G_\textrm{diffeo} or y = mx + b, you should use [ itex ]...[ /itex ] instead of [ tex ]...[ /tex ]. The "i" means "inline."

Click on each of the examples above to "learn by example."

If you have questions or comments about this site addition, you are welcome to post them here!

Good luck, and enjoy the system. Please test here: http://at.org/~cola/tex2img/index.php

- Warren

[Ambitwistor]

Better:


\Gamma^l_{ki} = \frac{1}{2} g^{lj} (\partial_k g_{ij} + \partial_i g_{jk} - \partial_j g_{ki})


Italicizing subscripts is unnecessary when those subscripts are variables and such; on the other hand, if they're words, you want to switch to text formatting instead of equation formatting.

Examples of subscripting/superscripting:

Good:


x_i



G_{ij}


Bad:


G_{diffeo}


Good:


G_\textit{diffeo}


G_\textrm{diffeo}


Bad:


R^a_{bcd}


Good:


R^a{}_{bcd}


Okay:


x_i^2


Maybe better:


{x_i}^2

[ahrkron]

Some more examples:


{\cal L}_R = \sum_{i=1}^G
\bar{E}^i_R(i\kern+0.1em /\kern-0.55em \partial
- g_1Y_E \kern+0.1em /\kern-0.65em B)E^i_R +
\bar{D}^i_R(i\kern+0.1em /\kern-0.65em D
- g_1Y_D \kern+0.1em /\kern-0.65em B)D^i_R +
\bar{U}^i_R(i\kern+0.15em /\kern-0.65em D
- g_1Y_U \kern+0.1em /\kern-0.65em B)U^i_R


V = \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
1-\frac{1}{2}\lambda^2 & \lambda & A\lambda^3(\rho-i\eta) \\
-\lambda & 1-\frac{1}{2}\lambda^2 & A\lambda^2 \\
A\lambda^3(1-\rho-i\eta) & -A\lambda^2 & 1
\end{array} \right) + {\cal O}(\lambda^4)



\newcommand{\colv}[2] {\left(\begin{array}{c} #1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right)}
L_L &=& \left(
{\colv{\nu_e}{e}}_L,
{\colv{\nu_\mu}{\mu}}_L,
{\colv{\nu_\tau}{\tau}}_L\,
\right), \qquad Y_L = -\frac{1}{2}



\newcommand{\colv}[2] {\left(\begin{array}{c} #1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right)}
Q_L &=& \left(
{\colv{u}{d}}_L,
{\colv{c}{s}}_L,
{\colv{t}{b}}_L\,
\right), \qquad\quad\ Y_Q = \frac{1}{6}

[Ambitwistor]

\def\pds{\kern+0.1em /\kern-0.55em \partial}
\def\lts#1{\kern+0.1em /\kern-0.65em #1}
{\cal L}_R = \sum_{i=1}^G
\bar{E}^i_R(i\pds
- g_1Y_E \lts{B})E^i_R +
\bar{D}^i_R(i\lts{D}
- g_1Y_D \lts{B})D^i_R +
\bar{U}^i_R(i\lts{D}
- g_1Y_U \lts{B})U^i_R)


There's actually a whole 'slashed' package for this...

[chroot]

Feel free to propose a list of packages to be included here. I don't want to include tooooo many, for fear of slowing down image generation unnecessarily. On the other hand, I may eventually make the tag

[ tex usepackage=apackage,anotherpackage ] [ /tex ]

or similar.

- Warren

[krab]

Lemme try.

H_1 = - {\sin \phi - \sin \phi_{\rm s}\over \beta c} \,
\sum_{j} e V_j \delta
(\theta -\theta_j) \left(D\,{p_x\over p_0} - D'x \right)

Way cool. Say, can I use this (write a tex in physicsforums, preview it, save the resulting png, ...) to generate png's for my own web pages?

[chroot]

Originally posted by krab
Way cool. Say, can I use this (write a tex in physicsforums, preview it, save the resulting png, ...) to generate png's for my own web pages?
You can, but try not to bog the server down too much. If you'd like to see the source code for the conversion process so you can run it on your own machine, pm me.

- Warren

[Greg Bernhardt]

Originally posted by krab
Say, can I use this (write a tex in physicsforums, preview it, save the resulting png, ...) to generate png's for my own web pages? [/B]

I don't wish to burst your bubble krab, but please don't do this. The LaTeX generator was made for use strictly on PF. The resources needed to make these graphics can be relatively demanding.

[krab]

...but please don't do this... You're right of course; it wouldn't be fair.

Hey Warren. Your pm box is full. I'd love to see the source.

[ahrkron]

Originally posted by krab
Hey Warren. Your pm box is full. I'd love to see the source. [/B]

Same here!

Great job, Warren!

[Ambitwistor]

Originally posted by krab
Way cool. Say, can I use this (write a tex in physicsforums, preview it, save the resulting png, ...) to generate png's for my own web pages?

You could download software to make your own PNGs:

http://latex2rtf.sourceforge.net/
http://www.fourmilab.ch/webtools/textogif/textogif.html

or make them online:

http://www.equationsheet.com/entertex.php

but unless you have access to server-side scripting, you'd have to upload them all statically.

[jcsd]

Brilliant! now excuse me while I just get a little practice

e^+e^-\rightarrow u \bar{u}

e^+e^-\rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-

e^+e^-\rightarrow \gamma\gamma

i\hbar\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial t} = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial x^2} + V\Psi

[Hurkyl]

Here's a question:

I know how to write:


\lim_{x\rightarrow 0} f(x)


But how do I get two levels of subscripting here? For instance, if I want to write


\lim_{x\rightarrow 0,~y \rightarrow 0} f(x, y)


but have a two-line subscript instead of a long one-line subscript?

[Ambitwistor]

\lim_{\substack{x\rightarrow 0\\y\rightarrow 0}} f(x,y)

[eljose79]

in fct it seems to complicate for me ..are there equation editors for latex?..i mean programs to write math simbols without knowing nothing of latex and a button to write integrals and limits

[jcsd]

It's actually quite simple, I've never used it before, but reading through the tutorial it only took me a couple of minutes to work out how to write the simple equations above. Just try messing around with it to get a little practice. Quote the integral below to see the code for it:


\int_{0}^{1} \frac{x}{\sqrt{a^2 + x^2}} dx = \left[ \sqrt{a^2 + x^2} \right]_{0}^{1}

[chroot]

Originally posted by jcsd
Quote the integral below to see the code for it:
Small tip you may have overlooked jcsd: you can simply click on any LaTeX image to get a popup window displaying its code.

- Warren

[Monique]

Just write down the regular formula on a piece of paper and one by one write down the code in the browser, it is really easy that way! Try a few simple things and the code that looked so incredibly overwhelming a few minutes ago, will look very logical :)

[jcsd]

I didn't realize that Chroot, I had Pop-up Stopper on [:)]

[phoenixthoth]

scientific notebook lets you create things that look like math but when you save it, it's in tex (or latex?). i'm looking for other equation editors myself cuz there is one thing i don't like about scientific notebook.

how does one go about adding tex capabilities to their message board?

[Adrian Baker]

Lets have a go....

2\pi\sqrt{l/g}


\gamma \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}}


edit: After three attempts I got it to work!!
[:)]

[chroot]

Displaying vectors can be tricky.

The default \vec LaTeX command produces a little arrow over the top of vectors, e.g.

\lambda_j = \vec{\lambda} \cdot \vec{e}_j

If you'd prefer to make your vectors boldface, just redefine the \vec command. See the source for this image to see how the command is redefined.


\renewcommand{\vec}[1]{\mbox{\boldmath $ #1 $}}

\lambda_j = \vec{\lambda} \cdot \vec{e}_j

- Warren

[lethe]

does this always generate display mode, or can we make it do inline mode as well?

[chroot]

Originally posted by lethe
does this always generate display mode, or can we make it do inline mode as well?
You mean, can you typeset your entire post in TeX and use $ $ to set off the math?

- Warren

[lethe]

Originally posted by chroot
You mean, can you typeset your entire post in TeX and use $ $ to set off the math?

- Warren

no, LaTeX has two modes, one for displaying equations inline (with $...$), where stuff is smaller, and another for display mode equations (\[ .... \]). the same equation will display differently depending on which you use. can we have access to both methods?

[chroot]

Originally posted by lethe
no, LaTeX has two modes, one for displaying equations inline (with $...$), where stuff is smaller, and another for display mode equations (\[ .... \]). the same equation will display differently depending on which you use. can we have access to both methods?
In what way are equations displayed differently in these two modes? AFAIK, math is displayed the same way in between $$ as in the displaymath environment.

- Warren

[Ambitwistor]

Display math:

\sum_i x^i

(inline) math, \mbox{$\sum_i x^i$}, hacked

[Ambitwistor]

Originally posted by chroot
In what way are equations displayed differently in these two modes? AFAIK, math is displayed the same way in between $$ as in the displaymath environment.

The 'displaymath' environment is the same as $$...$$, to show equations on a line by themselves, but $...$ is the 'math' environment, which is intended for equations inlined with other text.

[chroot]

Ambi,

Cool, I tried a few things and couldn't find anything that displayed differently!

Using \mbox is a fine way to do it.

- Warren

[chroot]

If it becomes a serious wishlist item for a lot of people, I can consider adding some attributes like mode=displaymath or mode=inline to the [ tex ] tag. Otherwise, \mbox is the easiest way to accomplish it.

- Warren

[lethe]

Originally posted by chroot
Ambi,

Cool, I tried a few things and couldn't find anything that displayed differently!

yeah, neither could i, because apparently the software doesn t recognize the inline mode commands...

Using \mbox is a fine way to do it.

OK, good enough

[chroot]

Originally posted by lethe
yeah, neither could i, because apparently the software doesn t recognize the inline mode commands...
No, I tried \mbox too -- but I tried y = mx + b, which looks the same in both environments, lol:

y = m x + b

\mbox{ $ y = m x + b $ }

- Warren

[lethe]

Originally posted by chroot
Otherwise, \mbox is the easiest way to accomplish it.

- Warren

do we have the amsmath package? mbox is a little limited, (like it doesn t go into subscripts very well), and \text is better.

[lethe]

Originally posted by chroot
No, I tried \mbox too -- but I tried y = mx + b, which looks the same in both environments, lol:


yeah, i think the only place where this makes a difference is for larger things like fractions, summations and integrations.

[Ambitwistor]

Originally posted by chroot
If it becomes a serious wishlist item for a lot of people, I can consider adding some attributes like mode=displaymath or mode=inline to the [ tex ] tag. Otherwise, \mbox is the easiest way to accomplish it.

It seems to me that typing "\mbox{}" is still easier than typing "mode=inline" ...

[Ambitwistor]

Yes, we have amsmath; I only recently started using it, so I keep forgetting about it...

However, if you're proposing \text as a replacement for \mbox in this instance ...

\mbox{$\sum_i x^i$}
\text{$\sum_i x^i$}

[lethe]

Originally posted by lethe
do we have the amsmath package? mbox is a little limited, (like it doesn t go into subscripts very well), and \text is better.

apparently not.

[lethe]

Originally posted by Ambitwistor
Yes, we have amsmath; I only recently started using it, so I keep forgetting about it...

However, if you're proposing \text as a replacement for \mbox in this instance ...


yes, it doesn t work... i assume that is because amsmath isn t loaded... or?

[lethe]

chroot-

on the pdf how-to provided on the first post of this thread, it states that [ tex ] is equivalent to $...$ (which makes inline math mode), but i guess what we have discovered here, is that it is actually equivalent to \[ ...\] (which makes display mode math).

perhaps the pdf can be updated?

[lethe]

Originally posted by lethe
. i assume that is because amsmath isn t loaded... or?

it seems that amsmath is loaded after all.

[chroot]

Yes, amsmath & amssymb are in fact available.

The code you type into [ tex ] tags goes directly into a \begin{displaymath}...\end{displaymath} environment. This can be changed if necessary. I assumed the majority of users would be putting equations set apart from their text, but this may not be a good assumption. I believe \mbox effectively just steps out it without any downsides.

- Warren

[Hurkyl]

Hrm,~line~breaks \\
don't~seem~to~work.

[Hurkyl]

All right, here's a new problem. How do I do this, but right?


\begin{array}{r l r l}
u &= \ln x \quad & dv &= x\,dx \\
du &= \frac{1}{x}\,dx & v &= \frac{1}{2} x^2
\end{array}

[lethe]

Originally posted by Hurkyl
All right, here's a new problem. How do I do this, but right?


i don t understand... what are you trying to do?

[Hurkyl]

There's too much space to the left of the equal signs. u=\ln x "should" be one entity instead of being spread over two seperate columns.

[Ambitwistor]

\begin{align}
u &= \ln x \quad & dv &= x\,dx \\
du &= \frac{1}{x}\,dx & v &= \frac{1}{2} x^2
\end{align}

[Ambitwistor]

\begin{align}
u &= \ln x \quad & dv &= x\,dx \\
du &= \mbox{$\frac{1}{x}\,dx$} & v &= \mbox{$\frac{1}{2} x^2$}
\end{align}

[jcsd]

If I want to denote the real and complex sets, using one of the below fonts which looks better?

\mathbb{RC}\mathbbmss{RC}\mathds{RC}

edited to add: it doesn't look like we have the other two fonts. There must be someway of represintg the real and complex sets in this manner, as the first fonts don't really look right to me.

[Ambitwistor]

Well, like it or not,

\mathbb{RC}

is pretty much the standard way of doing it in TeX.

There are other fonts and macros you can install, like bbold, mathbbol, doublestroke, bbm, mathpazo, etc., which all provide variations that are preferred by various people, but it's probably not worth the effort.

[jcsd]

I was just hpoing to get something more inline with what's in my textbooks, but I suppose the font is more than adequate.

[Monique]

How can LaTeX be made to look better in a Chemistry thread like this one?

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9475

I'd like the font smaller and the location more southwards.. any suggestions? Easy ones?

[Ambitwistor]

You might be able to hack in a smaller font, but there's no way around the subscript issue. The problem is that HTML doesn't know that the image is supposed to represent text with descenders in it, so it can't align the image's baseline with the normal HTML text surrounding it.

[chroot]

Actually, you can specify that images should be centered vertically within the line of text they're in -- I'm working on getting that attribute into the image tags. Politics, shmolitics.

- Warren

[Monique]

I just remembered that for simple annotations as that the sub and sup tags can be used :)

[chroot]

Update!

The LaTeX code has been improved a bit. I know you guys have been frustrated with the ugliness of inline TeX, so I went ahead and improved that.

I have introduced a new LaTeX command, the \inline command. Whenever you want to include a graphic inline with your text, like \inline{C H_4} or \inline{G_\textrm{diffeo}} or \inline{y = mx + b}, you should use the \inline{...} construct. Remember: click the LaTeX images to see how they're implemented.

Of course, you can inline larger pieces of TeX too, like \inline{\frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}}} or even \inline{e^x = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{x^n}{n!} = \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} (1+x/n)^n
}. But if makes more sense to include larger graphics set apart from your text, like this:

\frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}}

e^x = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{x^n}{n!} = \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} (1+x/n)^n

Note the difference in font sizing and layout between the normal and inlined graphics.

In addition, I have changed the TeX \vec command to boldface vectors. So feel free to use expressions like \inline{\vec{F} = m \vec{a}} to denote vector quantities.

Enjoy!

- Warren

[Hurkyl]

How do I get the arrows, then, if I want them?

[chroot]

Originally posted by Hurkyl
How do I get the arrows, then, if I want them?
Hmmm well, I thought I knew how, but now I'm not so sure. I'll have to look around. Maybe Ambitwistor knows a trick to put a command that has been \renew'd back to its default behavior.

Also, I found this pdf of useful mathematical constructs, that goes a bit beyond what we already have:

http://amath.colorado.edu/documentation/LaTeX/Symbols.pdf

- Warren

[Ambitwistor]

I don't know how to get a command back to its original behavior. You could try defining a new command to act like the original \vec before you redefine it. (Or else you could leave the original alone and define a new command to act like the bold version.)

[chroot]

Originally posted by Ambitwistor
I don't know how to get a command back to its original behavior. You could try defining a new command to act like the original \vec before you redefine it. (Or else you could leave the original alone and define a new command to act like the bold version.)
Both are good ideas. Generally, boldfacing is the "proper" way to represent vectors. Unfortunately, TeX treats lowercase greek letters and uppercase greek letters differently, making it fairly complicated to just boldface any old character. I put the macro into the system so people wouldn't have to jump through hoops if they just wanted to make a boldface \inline{\vec \lambda}.

Maybe redefining \boldmath to work everywhere is the best approach here, leaving \vec alone.

- Warren

[chroot]

I also just noticed that in IE6, the inline LaTeX images are a few pixels below the baseline of the text. In my preferred browser, Mozilla, they are exactly correct. Perhaps I need to tweak the site's style sheet to get the line spacing just right in all browsers. I'll have to think about it. In the meantime, everyone should switch to Mozilla Firebird! [:D]

- Warren

[chroot]

Actually, scratch that -- when the font size is set to "Medium" in the view menu, it's just right in IE6 too. (whew) Are any of you experiencing inline LaTeX graphics that are NOT aligned properly with your text?

- Warren

[chroot]

Also, Ambi, you LaTeX guru you,

Can you tell me why the font size is different between these two images?

\inline{
\int_{a}^{b}} e^x dx
}

\inline{
e^x = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{x^n}{n!} = \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} (1+x/n)^n
}

Look at the e^x... does the integral sign somehow cause the font size to change, or what?

- Warren

[lethe]

Originally posted by Hurkyl
How do I get the arrows, then, if I want them?

wouldn t it just be better to follow ams guidlines, and have \vec make an overline, and \mathbf make boldface? i much prefer boldface to arrows in print, but i don t see any reason to override ams defaults to get rid of arrows... they are not that bad...

[Hurkyl]

What about making a new tag, say, [ itex ] for inline tex? It gets annoying having to type [ tex ]\inline{x}[ /tex ] 10 times in a post!!!

[jcsd]

Your right it can be annoying, when I posted a load of inline text though, I just copied the commands onto the clipboard and pasted, changing the code between the inline brackets.

[chroot]

Originally posted by Hurkyl
What about making a new tag, say, [ itex ] for inline tex? It gets annoying having to type [ tex ]\inline{x}[ /tex ] 10 times in a post!!!
Yeah, I was strongly considering this from the beginning. Next time Greg lets me on the site, I'll do that.

- Warren

[chroot]

Okay guys, now [ itex ] ... [ /itex ] is equivalent to [ tex ]\inline{...}[ /tex ].

Have fun. [:)]

- Warren

[Hurkyl]

Woot!

[chroot]

Also, \vec now does \lambda_j = \vec{\lambda} \cdot \vec{e}_j while \mathbf does \lambda_j = \mathbf{\lambda} \cdot \mathbf{e}_j.

- Warren

[chroot]

And ams math environments should work now too:

a + b + c + d + e + f
+g+h+i+j+k+l+m+n


\begin{multline*}
a + b + c + d + e + f\\
+g+h+i+j+k+l+m+n
\end{multline*}



\begin{gather*}
a_1 = b_1 + c_1\\
a_2 = b_2 + c_2 - d_2 + e_2
\end{gather*}


- Warren

[chroot]

Guide to using the amsmath package:

http://www.cds.caltech.edu/~dunbar/docs/amsldoc.pdf

- Warren

[lethe]

noice

[Hurkyl]

What are all the spacers available to us? (like '~' and '\,')

(and remember, I'm a LaTeX newbie, so mentioning what they're supposed to do is nice [:)] probably should go in the .pdf too)

[Hurkyl]

Is there a smaller triangle that goes well here? What's the command for the floor and ceiling functions? Am I spelling the command for omicron wrong, or is omicron identical to 'o' so there isn't a command?

\Delta x \triangle x
\Delta x \triangle x

[Ambitwistor]

ab
a b
a\! b
a\, b
a\: b
a\; b

[Ambitwistor]

Originally posted by Hurkyl
Is there a smaller triangle that goes well here?

What do you want a triangle for?

What's the command for the floor and ceiling functions?

\lfloor x \rfloor, \lceil y \rceil

Am I spelling the command for omicron wrong, or is omicron identical to 'o' so there isn't a command?

The latter.

[Ambitwistor]

'~' isn't really intended to add space in LaTeX; it's just like a regular space, except it's non-breaking (LaTeX won't try to insert a line break there).

[Hurkyl]

f(x + \Delta x) = f(x) + f'(x) \Delta x + \varepsilon(\Delta x) \Delta x

The triangle seems a little on the big side to me.

[Ambitwistor]

The triangle seems a little on the big side to me.

The triangle, or the letter Delta? If you mean the triangle, what are you trying to use it for?

[Hurkyl]

Yes, it's the letter delta; I want to use it as one notates a differential or a difference, as in \Delta x (my previous post is the theorem I wanted to state in a post; I copped out with \delta x but I prefer the capital delta).

When I write it by hand, I usually write the delta as the same height as a lower case letter... but now that I've checked some reference material, it seems that the full-size is the norm; ah well. I'd still like to know if I can make a half sized one should I want to in a post. [:)]

[Ambitwistor]

It may not be too easy to get a small Delta of the correct size...

\Delta x
\mbox{\small $\displaystyle\Delta$} x

[Loren Booda]

I have trouble opening

http://www.physicsforums.com/misc/howtolatex.pdf

[jcsd]

Have you got Adobe Acrobat Reader?

http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html

[Hurkyl]

\frac{\mathbb{N}}{\mathbb{N}}=\mathbb{N}why am I over here?

For some reason this image contains a lot of whitespace on my browser; the text is all on the right side of the message!

[Loren Booda]

This LaTeX seems to be missing the Greek letter "omicron."

[chroot]

Originally posted by Loren Booda
This LaTeX seems to be missing the Greek letter "omicron."
All LaTeX is "missing" this character. The Greek omicron is exactly the same as the Roman 'o,' and thus has no special \omicron command. Just use 'o.' It's the same story with \Alpha and \Rho and so on.

- Warren

[chroot]

Hurkyl,

I'm not exactly sure why that's happening. Apprently it's the \frac command that's doing it, coupled with the way I crop inline images. (Inline images are cropped differently from display-mode images, so that they appear at the right location vertically). I'll have to do some more thorough experimenting next time I'm on the site. In the meantime, don't inline \frac I guess. [t)]

You can also inline it manual-style like this: \mbox{ \Large $ \frac{\mathbb{N}}{\mathbb{N}}=\mathbb{N} $}. Doing so renders the image as inline-mode, but crops the image as display-mode (meaning it may not appear at the right position vertically). It works, but that's a bit ridiculous. I'll look into it next time I get the chance.

- Warren

[Hurkyl]

One should probably use \mathbb{N}/\mathbb{N} style fractions in inline text anyways, but a bug is still a bug!

[vu3ogi]

Originally posted by Hurkyl
One should probably use \mathbb{N}/\mathbb{N} style fractions in inline text anyways, but a bug is still a bug!

I agree with Hurkyl. fraction type \frac{\mathbb{N}}{\mathbb{N}}=\mathbb{N} should only be used in equation ( or eqnarray), but while writing along with text we should use \mathbb{N}/\mathbb{N}

cheers,
Nagaraj
/**********************/
VU3OGI is my HAM callsign
/**********************/

[lethe]

any ideas why this isn t working?


\begin{multline*}
\tan^n \theta=\tan^{n-2}\theta \tan^2 \theta\\ =\tan^{n-2}\theta(\sec^2\theta-1)=\tan^{n-2}\theta\sec^2\theta-\tan^{n-2}\theta
\end{multline*}

[chroot]

Mainly because the environment is not called multiline, it's called multline (without the 'i'). Try this:


\begin{multline*}
\tan^n \theta=\tan^{n-2}\theta \tan^2 \theta\\ =\tan^{n-2}\theta(\sec^2\theta-1)=\tan^{n-2}\theta\sec^2\theta-\tan^{n-2}\theta
\end{multline*}


- Warren

[lethe]

Originally posted by chroot
Mainly because the environment is not called multiline, it's called multline (without the 'i'). Try this:


oops... i m an idiot.

thanks chroot.

[Hurkyl]

How do I make a script P, such as is typically used in the notation for a power set P(X)?

[Ambitwistor]

\mathcal{P}(X)

[mormonator_rm]

Hi folks!

I'm just setting up a practice spot for myself here. Don't mind me. These will be changing/dissappearing as I get new thoughts, but feel free to watch my struggles.


M^2 = \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
M^2_{11} & M^2_{18}\\
M^2_{18} & M^2_{88}
\end{array}
\right)



M^2_{88} = \frac {1}{3} \left(4m^2_{K} - m^2_{\pi}\right)



M^2_{11} = m^2_{\eta} + m^2_{\eta'} - M^2_{88}



M^2_{18} = - \sqrt{(M^2_{88} - m^2_{\eta})(m^2_{\eta'} - M^2_{88})}



\tan\theta_{P} = \frac {M^2_{88} - m^2_{\eta}}{M^2_{18}}


Dang this is freakin' cool!!!


\begin{multline*}
\eta = \eta_{8}\cos\theta_{P} - \eta_{1}\sin\theta_{P}\\
\eta' = \eta_{8}\sin\theta_{p} + \eta_{1}\cos\theta_{P}
\end{multline*}



\eta_{1} = \frac {u\bar{u} + d\bar{d} + s\bar{s}}{\sqrt{3}},
\eta_{8} = \frac {u\bar{u} + d\bar{d} - 2s\bar{s}}{\sqrt{6}}


I just can't stop...


\nu_e



\nu_e\bar

[jcsd]

\neq

What would be the symbol for 'not equivalent to' and how would you represent it in latex?

[jcsd]

Wouldn't it just be a crossed equivalent sign (or is that stronger than 'not equivalent to'?)? which I can't seem to get that anyway.

\nequiv \notequiv

[Ambitwistor]

\not\equiv

[jcsd]

thanks!

I was looking at a table of glyphs used in maths and it had that sign as 'not identical to' is that interchangable with 'not equivalent to' or can the sign mena both things?

[Ambitwistor]

The symbol can be read as either "identical" or "equivalent".

[Ambitwistor]

By the way, I never answered this...

Originally posted by chroot
Can you tell me why the font size is different between these two images?

\int_{a}^{b}} e^x dx

e^x = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{x^n}{n!} = \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} (1+x/n)^n


Look at the TeX for the first one: it has an extra closing curly brace }. Thus, since the TeX expression is being implicitly enclosed within \inline{...}, that extra brace closes the inline, and the e^x dx is not inlined.

You don't need the curly braces here anyway... it should just be \int_a^b e^x\,dx.

[phantomAI]

Wow this is awesome, but is there a sperate program or way that I can do the Math Typesetting offline or find it as a standard software? I would like to be able to type out some mathematical notes for my self since my hand writing is a bit sloppy and my notebook becomes incoherent... [g)]

[master_coda]

Originally posted by phnatomAI
Wow this is awesome, but is there a sperate program or way that I can do the Math Typesetting offline or find it as a standard software? I would like to be able to type out some mathematical notes for my self since my hand writing is a bit sloppy and my notebook becomes incoherent... [g)]

You can use MiKTeX (http://www.miktex.org/) if you use Windows. If you use Linux, your distro should already have TeX and LaTeX software.

[lovin_physics05]

im kinda slow, andim not that advanced, so im tryin lil things. but i like this thing, ima be the only person in my class with a fully typed physics report.


f_{x}=f\cos\theta

[phantomAI]

Originally posted by master_coda
You can use MiKTeX (http://www.miktex.org/) if you use Windows. If you use Linux, your distro should already have TeX and LaTeX software.

I installed it but how do I use it? Do I just go to notepad and type up and save it as a .dvi file?

[futz]

Originally posted by phnatomAI
I installed it but how do I use it? Do I just go to notepad and type up and save it as a .dvi file?

You type it up in a regular text file, then save it with a .tex extension. Then, you need to compile it by typing "latex file" (no quotes, in Windows, at a DOS prompt, in the directory where the file is saved), where file.tex is the thing you just saved. This will generate a DVI file. With Miktex, you can then type "yap file", which opens the Yap DVI viewer.

Alternatively, you can output to a PDF file by typing "pdflatex file" at the prompt.

[chroot]

Unfortunately, LaTeX has a rather stiff learning curve.

Fortunately, there are 4.9 gabillion webpages to help you out. Just google around for some sample documents.

- Warren

[lethe]

can we make feynman diagrams?

\begin{fmfchar*}(40,25)
\fmfleft{em,ep}
\fmf{fermion}{em,Zee,ep}
\fmf{photon,label=$Z$}{Zee,Zff}
\fmf{fermion}{fb,Zff,f}
\fmfright{fb,f}______
\fmfdot{Zee,Zff}
\end{fmfchar*}

[chroot]

Originally posted by lethe
can we make feynman diagrams?
Not yet. I have considered adding the feynmf package, but, since it uses metafont, it would involve adding an additional stage to the image generation process. I'm not sure I want to go through all that trouble!

- Warren

[lethe]

Originally posted by chroot
Not yet. I have considered adding the feynmf package, but, since it uses metafont, it would involve adding an additional stage to the image generation process. I'm not sure I want to go through all that trouble!

- Warren

stop being so lazy!!!

just kidding, chroot.

actually, i just tried to get feynmf working on my computer, and failed. grr...

so i can sympathize.

[Hurkyl]

Just wondering!

\ddot{\smile}}

[Bob3141592]

I seem to be having a problem generating "n choose m"

Let's see if it works better here

x=({\colv{n}{m}})

Did that work?

[Bob3141592]

What's this? The sample I used as my template before just used the \colv command to line up two expressions over each other, but if I click the sample above that, I se a \newcommand statement that uses an array construct. Aha! Let's see if I can do that myself, as in


\newcommand{\colv}[2] {\left(\begin{array}{c} #1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right)}X = {\colv{n}{m}}

I hope that does the trick!

[Bob3141592]

Yes! Hallelluah! Now, let's see if that new command works as the first nonprintable line in a post and applies throughout it.

no, it's a transient macro. It has to go on every tex statement and gets forgotten on the /tex. Too bad.

\newcommand{\colv}[2] {\left(\begin{array}{c} #1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right)}\colv{n}{m} = \frac{n!}{(n-m)!m!}

\newcommand{\colv}[2] {\left(\begin{array}{c} #1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right)}\colv{n}{m} = \colv{n}{n-m}

Plus, it is so easy to mistype a brace as a parentheses! I hate it when that happens.

But, at least that's one problem down. Onwards to the prefix superscript next.

[master_coda]

If you want choose notation, just use

\binom{n}{m}=\binom{n}{n-m}

[Bob3141592]

This is a test - and a place to make experimental edits. I'll remove most of this post and post it with explanatory comments in the general math folder later.

Editing a long post doesn't always work (get a lot of "website not responding" errors). Let's see if shortening the post helps.

tbd

[Hurkyl]

You know, it doesn't all have to be written on one line.

[Bob3141592]

Originally posted by Hurkyl
You know, it doesn't all have to be written on one line.

Perhaps not, but it's been a fun (and frustrating!) exercise to learn LaTex, and get it to do exactly what I want it to. If I make compromises before I learn how to do it, I'll never learn what it's capable of.

[Bob3141592]

Originally posted by master_coda
If you want choose notation, just use

\binom{n}{m}=\binom{n}{n-m}

Thanks, Coda. That's much easier!

[Hurkyl]

I mean your actual LaTeX source code can be written across several lines, making it easier to read sometimes.

[Bob3141592]

Okay, back to experimenting/debugging tex:

Got it. Oh, happy day...er.. night.

[master_coda]

You do it like this:

3^n = \sum_{m=0}^n \left( \binom{n}{m} \cdot \sum_{p=0}^m \binom{m}{p} \right)

[Bob3141592]

Originally posted by master_coda
You do it like this:

I see. The \left and \right are generic, and you ave to supply the character specific delimiter following.

Thanks again!

I do wish LaTex had error messages, giving hints aout why it's parser is bailing out, but I guess that's a bit much to ask for. Ah well, if it was easy, anybody could do it. [:)]

[chroot]

Originally posted by Bob3141592
I see. The \left and \right are generic, and you ave to supply the character specific delimiter following.

Thanks again!

I do wish LaTex had error messages, giving hints aout why it's parser is bailing out, but I guess that's a bit much to ask for. Ah well, if it was easy, anybody could do it. [:)]
That sort of output IS generated by the latex program itself -- but getting that parsed into the PHP output would be a bear, basically.

I also have to add the fact that LaTeX errors are usually pretty unhelpful anyway, so there doesn't seem to be much reason to provide it for the user.

- Warren

[Bob3141592]

I've seen &=& used, but I don't understand the difference it makes. Is there a simple explanation? What's the & do in general, if it has a general interpretation.

This stuff is great. Not easy, I must admit, but definately worth it.

[master_coda]

Usually & acts as an alignment character. For example, in:


\begin{align*}
D^{-\nu}e^{at}&=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\nu)}e^{at}\int_0^t x^{\nu-1}e^{ax}\;dx \\
&=E_t(\nu,a)
\end{align*}


the & character specifies how the columns are supposed to be lined up. Note that \\ specifies the end of each line.

The & character is also used to separate columns in a matrix. If someone is using &=& to line up their equations instead of &=, they may be using matrices to align equations.

[Tron3k]

Just figuring this out...

y = a x^2 + b x + c
x = \frac{-b \pm \sqrt{b^2 - 4 a c}}{2 a}

[Silverious]

hmmmm

d = \frac{1}{2}a t^2

\sum F = ma

\lim_{x\rightarrow c} f(x) = L

0 \leq |x - c| \leq \delta

|f(x) - L| \leq \epsilon

F_g = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{d^2}

this = fun

[Allegro]

Let's give it a try (using TexAide):

\frac{{\sqrt s }}{{s - a^2 }}






\displaystyle{\int_2^4 {\left[ {8(t - 2)} \right]^{-0.5} dt = } \left[ {\frac{1}{{\sqrt 2 }}(t - 2)^{0.5} } \right]_2^4 = 1}


With compliments to TeXaide.

[phoenixthoth]

how do i go about installing such a thing on my discussion forum? any help much appreciated!

[Allegro]

Hello phoenixthoth,

#1.
Download TeXaide:
http://www.mathtype.com/en/products/TeXaide/

#2.
Type in an equation in TeXaide and copy it.

#3
Paste it in your message on the Physics Forum,then go to my previous message and click on quote,then you can see how it is done.

Delete all superfluous characters.


Best regards.

[phoenixthoth]

Originally posted by Allegro
Hello phoenixthoth,

#1.
Download TeXaide:
http://www.mathtype.com/en/products/TeXaide/

#2.
Type in an equation in TeXaide and copy it.
Paste it in your message on the Physics Forum,between:
First type: \displaystyle{.............}and finish with
where ....... is your equation.
Delete all superfluous characters.

#3.
Go to my previous message and click on quote,then you can see how it is done.

Best regards.

how do i go about installing such a thing on my discussion forum? any help much appreciated!

thanks for trying to help but that wasn't my question. let me try to be more careful.
0. i already know how to make equations appear on this forum.
1. i have my own discussion forum.
2. i want to install something that will enable me to do what i can do on this forum on that forum.

i tried mimetex (from http://www.forkosh.com/htdocs/mimetex.html), but i'm having trouble compiling their source files into a mimetex.cgi file. it would help trememdously to just have a copy of that cgi file in question so that i can put it on my server. when i tried compiling their source files, i got a bunch of errors that i suspect are related to the fact that i'm running windows or perhaps the compiler i'm using. i'm trying to get the anti-aliasing gif version to work by entering
cc -DAA mimetex.c gifsave.c -lm -o mimetex.cgi
but it gives lots of errors.

so if you know anything on how to install an equivalent gif generator that uses html, let me know. any help is appreciated!

[Hurkyl]

Oh no! The inline TeX no longer is aligned!

[chroot]

What in the world are you doing? It works fine for me... \vec F = m \vec a

And how about this? \TeX

If you put random text in, though.... hmmm who knows?

- Warren

[Hurkyl]

It's because I've written superscripted normal text.

[chroot]

Originally posted by Hurkyl
It's because I've written superscripted normal text.
Oh, of course... hmmm, yeah. There's really no way around that. [:(]

- Warren

[master_coda]

Originally posted by chroot
Oh, of course... hmmm, yeah. There's really no way around that. [:(]

- Warren

There really isn't any reason you would want superscripted text and tex in the same message anyway.

[Hurkyl]

I put a footnote in one of my messages. I had an itex formula in it, and I tend to put my footnote tags in superscripts1. Thus, the bug was discovered. [:(]



1: such as this one

[lethe]

what is going on with TeX today? is it broken?

see this (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=146523#post146523) thread

[lethe]

let's see if it works over here:

\int_M d\omega=\int_{\partial M}\omega

[chroot]

lethe, your link is apparently not valid. What is happening? As far as I know, \TeX is working fine.

- Warren

[lethe]

Originally posted by chroot
lethe, your link is apparently not valid. What is happening? As far as I know, \TeX is working fine.

- Warren

this morning, it seemed like LaTeX wasn't working. i guess i linked to a post that i later deleted or something. i guess that is why the link i gave didn't work (although i don't think a broken anchor is usually enough to break a link, but whatever.)

anyway, try this (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9975&perpage=40&pagenumber=1) link. look at matt grime's post near the bottom.

everywhere there should be a LaTeX image, intsead, you get "latex still being generated, please reload" messages. i was getting the same thing in my posts, which i later deleted in order to try to recify the problem.

at any rate, whatever the problem was, it seems to be fixed now, although you can still see the weird messages now.

[Hurkyl]

I can't figure out what's going on with this one (though I haven't tried a lot)

Using this theorem, if x^3 - x^2 - 8x + 12 has a rational root, then it can be written in the form p/q where p \in \{1, -1\} and q \in \{1, -1, 2, -2, 3, -3, 4, -4, 6, -6, 12, -12\}. Only 12 possibilities to try, so if one exists you can find it by exhaustion. [:)]

[chroot]

It seems to be due to the length of the itex element. I'll see if I can figure out what's up with it. In the meantime, please use the normal tex (not itex) tags to typeset this.

- Warren

[ilml]

a_x

[jhirlo]

I've downloaded that pdf file with code instuctions, but there's no "non equal" sign [8)] [8)] .[*(]

Do you know the code (it's for slashed equal sign)?

[chroot]

\neq

[BLUE_CHIP]

\Delta{T}
lux
V
R_1
R_{LDR}
\simeq{6V}
I

I=\frac{V_{out}-V_{LDR}}{R_1}

R=\frac{V}{I}

\Longrightarrow

....(1)
....(2)
(1),(2)


R_{LDR}=\frac{V_{LDR}R_1}{V_{out}-V_{LDR}}

R_1=\sqrt{(10^7-\lim_{R\rightarrow 0})}

R_{Max}
R_{Min}

=3162.27766
\simeq{3000}\Omega
\frac{\delta{y}}{\delta{x}}=\frac{9}{7.8}
=1\frac{1}{13}

R-R_1=m((lux)-(lux)_1)

R-8=-1\frac{1}{13}((lux)-4)
R=-1\frac{1}{13}(lux)+4\frac{4}{13}
13R-14(lux)=160
R=\frac{160-14(lux)}{13}
R=e^{\frac{160-14ln(lux)}{13}}
I=\frac{V}{R}
I=\frac{Q}{t}
ln(R)=\frac{1}{ln(lux)}
\frac{\pi}{6}(0.3)^{3}(7.07)g=\frac{\pi}{6}(0.3)^{3}(1.26)g+3\pi(0.88){u}(0.3)
[tex]u=\frac{d^{2}}{18\mu}[\tex]
[tex]\frac{ud\rho}{\mu}[\tex]

[outandbeyond2004]

I thought Latex did not work, but it did. The trouble seems to be with the Review message function. try \pm 8 and hit the check button. it is supposed to be plus-minus 8, but comes out f1 8. Latex does work after you send the message, tho.

[Janitor]

Alrighty------

Humble \pi

John Lennon \longleftrightarrowYoko Ono

Rev. Jim Bakker \heartsuit Jessica Hahn.

Beyonce' = \bigodot \bigodot

Charlie's Angels = \bigodot \bigodot \bigodot \bigodot \bigodot \bigodot

\exists Elvis iff \infty= -33.043034.

Hello Dave. I am your HAL-9000 heuristic, algorithmic digital computer. Would you like me to open the pod bay door? \bowtie \perp \parallel \frown

[Clausius2]

Anyone knows where can I download LaTex as a ZIP file? My download rate is too slow.

[Philcorp]

Ok. Ive been trying to know how to make a lower case script r (for example, like in Griffiths' Electrodynamics book) for about a year now.........i was wondering if anyone around here maybe knew how?

[JohnDubYa]

This board is another reason PHYSICS RULES!

Okay, I have to try this out

\int_\infty^0 \frac{\partial x}{\partial t}\,dx

[JohnDubYa]

He wants a script r. I am not sure how Griffith's r's look, but have you tried the calligraphic style?

Try R_{\cal R}


Try [ tex ]R_{\cal R}[ \tex ]

I don't think it works with lowercase.

[Cod]

Originally posted by JohnDubYa
He wants a script r. I am not sure how Griffith's r's look, but have you tried the calligraphic style?

Try R_{\cal R}


Try [ tex ]R_{\cal R}[ \tex ]

I don't think it works with lowercase.
You have to use a forward slash ( / ). It won't work if you use back slash ( \ ).

[Janitor]

x^3 + m^2


\partial\^2


i\hbar\frac{\partial\Psi}{\partial t} = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial x^2} + V\Psi


\partial z

\partial_z

\partial^2

\partial\^2

\partial^2 + m^2

det[\partial^2 + m^2]

[JohnDubYa]

I am posting this demo for Dan:

\int_\infty^0 \sin(\theta)

[Hurkyl]

LaTeX doesn't seem to work yet in the new forums. [:(]

[Greg Bernhardt]

chroot still needs to install it, hopefully tonight

[JohnDubYa]

I still want this LaTeX capability for my own discussion boards for helping students with remedial math. Is it available? Can I buy it?

[chroot]

It's custom-designed, by me. If you'd like to contract me to work on your site, send me a PM....

- Warren

[chroot]

Testing...

x^{5000}

[chroot]

Testing...

\int_\infty^0 \sin(\theta)

[chroot]

Testing...


\gamma \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}}

[chroot]

Testing...


R^{a}{}_{bcd}

[chroot]

All right folks, looks like LaTeX is back in business on the new pf. Feel free to let me know if anything seems not to work!

[chroot]

One more test!

a^x_n

[KSCphysics]

[ tex ]x^3[ \tex ]

[KSCphysics]

R^{x}{}_{bcd}

[Hurkyl]

Why are we getting these extra dashes?

[Michael D. Sewell]

\Delta(x) = v_o + 1/2at^2
cool^n

[Michael D. Sewell]

\Delta x = v_o - 1/2at^2
\Delta x = v_o - 1/2at^2
2drinks = meow^2

[chroot]

Why are we getting these extra dashes?
What extra dashes?

- Warren

[Hurkyl]

These dashes.

[chroot]

Hurkyl,

That's kinda funny. I don't see those dashes in my browser. Can you right click on a latex image and view it by itself in a new window? Do the dashes still appear there?

- Warren

[Hurkyl]

Nope.


BTW, someone else mentioned also having this problem, I don't remember who.

[chroot]

Hmmmmm. What browser are you using?

- Warren

[Hurkyl]

Opera 7.23

Sometimes they appear high like that, and sometimes they appear low.


Oh, and I get them in Netscape 7.0 too. (appearing low for the image I posted)

[chroot]

And this never used to happen in PF2? Does clicking on a latex image still bring up the little code dialog?

- Warren

[Hurkyl]

Never happened before the upgrade. And yes, I can still get the code popup.

[chroot]

Test... \beta

[Hurkyl]

And there still be a dash. It's low.

[chroot]

Test... \sqrt{x} \{sqrt}{x}

[chroot]

Testing... E = -grad\Phi

[chroot]

Testing... E = \grad\Phi

[chroot]

Testing... E = mc^2
E = -grad\Phi

[chroot]

Testing.. \sqrt x

[Hurkyl]

still dashes. All low.

[chroot]

Hurkyl,

I'm afraid it really may just be a bug in your browser.

- Warren

[Hurkyl]

The dash goes away if I take out the anchor tag.

Oddly, if I change "<a href..." to "<b href..." it shows up fine.

[chroot]

Right, your browser is not obeying the border=0 attribute on the images for some reason -- likely because of a style sheet or other bug.

- Warren

[chroot]

Test...... \infty

[JohnDubYa]

I am just testing the new LateX engine.

x = \int_\infty^0 \sin(\cos(\theta)) \,dx \frac{e^x}{\log(x)}

[hughes johnson]

e=mc^2
f=ma

Blah, blah, blah

[Hurkyl]

Hey, I don't see the dashes today. Woohoo! (I wonder how long it's been?)

[gnome]

Is there a way to force this to be displayed bigger:

{ a^{log_cb} = b^{log_ca}

and is there a way to make it clearer that c is a base?

[chroot]

Use an \mbox{} to step out of the default format, then use one of the font size commands to set the desired size.

\mbox{\large a^{\log_cb} = b^{\log_ca}}
\mbox{\Large a^{\log_cb} = b^{\log_ca}}
\mbox{\LARGE a^{\log_cb} = b^{\log_ca}}
\mbox{\huge a^{\log_cb} = b^{\log_ca}}
\mbox{\Huge a^{\log_cb} = b^{\log_ca}}

- Warren

[chroot]

Hey, I don't see the dashes today. Woohoo! (I wonder how long it's been?)
Whoops, I forgot to tell you I fixed that... :redface:

- Warren

[PRyckman]

Wow, I'd like to be involved in this but all those formulas are greek to me, the symbols.
I can't handle stuff like that, throughout school I was always daydreaming. I did well on the tests because I understood not because I studied. Eventually that was way to much for me though. But I never gave up on physics. I stuck to the theoretical side, there are many things left to prove. My mind always focused on the vastness of space, it's intricisies(sp?) It's explained and it's not. Since I heard E=mc2 I never doubted it. I took it as fact and thought about what it could mean. Where it's explanation stopped, and it's implications began.

So, Sorry I can't give any cool input on your thread chroot :) :P

I really appreciate your thought into mine though. Because like I said my math isn't as advanced as yours. I would never be able to prove anything if I can't get someone to help me.

[chroot]

We're not discussing anything in this thread, PRyckman. It started as a tutorial of PF's LaTeX math typesetting, and turned into a test thread. People are just posting random equations to learn how the typesetting works.

- Warren

[PRyckman]

yes i read the first 20 posts or so only and last 5 or 10

[gnome]

Why is this fraction not displaying correctly?

\mbox{\Huge B = \frac{1}{15} }

[Sauter]

\newcount\n
\n=1
\def\abc#1{
\ifnum\n<#1
\the\n \par
\advance\n by 1
\abc{#1}
\fi
}
\abc{10}

[Sauter]

Why is this fraction not displaying correctly?

\mbox{\Huge B = \frac{1}{15} }


\Huge B = \frac{1}{15}

[Sauter]

Why is this fraction not displaying correctly?

\mbox{\Huge B = \frac{1}{15} }

\mbox{\Huge B = $\frac{1}{15}$ }

[IooqXpooI]

Ehehehe.

\mbox{\Huge \frac{U_4^{T_1}}{\frac {M_0}{P_v(M_4)}}}

[gnome]

This is my first attempt to use tex locally.
I'm trying to produce a .gif or .png image of a tex-formatted equation.

I created this file, named logic1.tex:
\documentclass{article}
\begin{document}
\begin{flushleft}
\begin{displaymath}
\pi \models \phi \Rightarrow \psi \:\textrm{iff}\:\pi \not\models \phi \:\textrm{or}\:\pi \models \psi
\end{displaymath}
\end{flushleft}
\end{document}


When I run
>latex logic1.tex
it produces logic1.dvi which I can view with the kdvi viewer & it appears to be correct. But when I run
>textogif logic1.tex
or
>textogif -png logic1.tex
the resulting image file has the equation superimposed over a checkerboard-pattern background which makes it virtually impossible to read.

What am I doing wrong?

How about my logic1.tex file: is anything missing or extraneous?

[chroot]

The checkerboard pattern is the "standard" way to show that parts of an image are transparent. Try including the image in a web page to see how it looks.

- Warren

[gnome]

Thanks Warren.

But then, how can I make a png or gif image with a plain white background that I can send someone, to be opened with an ordinary viewer (not on a web page)?

[chroot]

Use one of the many utilities available for changing gif (or png) color tables.

- Warren

[Edwin]

V_e = \frac{c[v_1 - (v_1 - x)]}{v_1 + (v_1 - x)}



V_e = \frac{c[v_1 - (v_1 - x)]}{v_1 + (v_1 - x)}

V_e^2 \equiv \frac{c^2x^2}{(2v_1-x)(2v_1-x)}



\gamma \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}}

V_e=v[\tex]

[tex]\gamma \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{1- \frac{c^2x^2}{(2v_1-x)(2v_1-x}}/c^2

\gamma \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{1- \frac{x^2}{(2v_1-x)(2v_1-x)}}}

\gamma \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{1- \frac{x^2}{(2v_1-x)(2v_1-x)}}}

[gnome]

Please take a look at post #4 on this thread
http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=203474#post203474
and tell me what I should have done to make the line spacing and font size more consistent.

[Edwin]

V_e = \frac{c[v_1 - (v_1 - x)]}{v_1 + (v_1 - x)}



V_e = \frac{c[v_1 - (v_1 - x)]}{v_1 + (v_1 - x)}

V_e^2 \equiv \frac{c^2x^2}{(2v_1-x)(2v_1-x)}



\gamma \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}}

V_e=v[\tex]

[tex]\gamma \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{1- \frac{c^2x^2}{(2v_1-x)(2v_1-x}}/c^2

\gamma \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{1- \frac{x^2}{(2v_1-x)(2v_1-x)}}}

\gamma \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{1- \frac{x^2}{(2v_1-x)(2v_1-x)}}}

[Hurkyl]

tell me what I should have done to make the line spacing and font size more consistent.

Believe it or not, the font size is consistent.

If you want better spacing, maybe you could put all of the equations in a single tex tag. Check the first page for an example.

[chroot]

Edwin,

Since you seem to be addicted to nesting pieces of TeX inside other pieces of TeX, I will advise you that you can use whitespace inside the [ tex ] tags to make your code easier to write (and read). In other words, code like this is fine (click the image to see the code):

\frac{
\frac{3}{4}
}{
\frac{1}{2}
}

- Warren

[Edwin]

Thanks Warren! That was a helpful bit of information :)


Best Regards,

Edwin

[Hurkyl]

If you're still working on your TeX identifier for the newsgroups, here's a good one to tweak it on:

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=24389

[justintime]

let me have a try!
a=b^3

[BobG]

We'll give it a try (doesn't look to promising in preview mode) But it almost works once posted.


\ddot\lambda + \omega^2_E \left(\frac{R_E}{a}\right)^2

Now, that's what we're looking for. Takes a little time to get the feel for the order and size, etc.

[chroot]

Bob:

It should work just fine in preview mode. Some browsers may cache images, and you may have to force them not to.

- Warren

[arildno]

Hi, I have a question concerning the following Latex/(Tex?) commands:
I tried to make a listing with the following command structure (within the environment delimited by the tex-brackets):
\begin{enumerate}
\item ...
\item ...
\end{enumerate}
This has for me always produced a numbered list for each \item included,
but when I tried it on PF, the numbers failed to appear, and the items did not appear on separate lines
(A similar result was with "itemize" rather than "enumerate", which usually have produced dots rather than numbers in front of the items included)

So, what's the listing commands I should use here?

[Vance]

\ddot\lambda + \omega^2_E \left(\frac{R_E}{a}\right)^2

[Vance]

Copy and paste works fine

[Vance]

I would like to make a question:
I know of Latex when using Linux system of my school, but there isnot Latex for Windows, right ? If I would like to practise learning Latex but in Windows, that is impossible right ?

Please help me, please forgive my newie question because I am actually a newie...Please....
:)
Thanks in advance

[chroot]

Look into a package called MikTeX for windows.

- Warren

[Vance]

Look into a package called MikTeX for windows.

- Warren
Thanks Warren a lot...

lol...
Regards

[Dr Transport]

With MikTeX installed, look at a Windows gui called TeXnic Center, which may indeed have MikTeX along with it. The link on tug.org was broken when I looked last, but I have been extrememly happy with it. I have also used WinEdit.

[TALewis]

Testing:


\mathcal{L}\{y\}=Y


\mathcal{L}\{y'\}=sY-y(0)


\mathcal{L}\{y''\}=s^2Y-sy(0) -y'(0)

[VNmaths]

Just testing

\int f(x)dx , x^2+y^2+z^2=1

[Pattielli]

Te sientas entre la gente
Cierras tu ojos
Y suenas que soy tuyo
Pero yo no siquiera se que estas ahi
Me gustaria tenerte entre mis brazos amor

[Pattielli]

Oh it can be centered....:sm:

[H-bar None]

Testing

\tau/=E/m

[undersun]

Hi,

I need a BIG VECTOR. Something like that

------->
<a,b,c,d>

How can I do this? I tried \vec but does not fires. Tnx for any help

[master_coda]

Hi,

I need a BIG VECTOR. Something like that

------->
<a,b,c,d>

How can I do this? I tried \vec but does not fires. Tnx for any help

Use \overrightarrow{ ... vector goes here ... }

[emporium]

\omega=\sqrt\frac{GM}{r^3}

x=\frac{-b\pm\sqrt{b^2-4ac}}{2a}

f(x)=f(0)+f'(0)x+\frac{f''(0)x^2}{2!}+\frac{f'''(o)x^3}{3!}

\int{u\frac{dv}{dx}}=uv-\int{\frac{du}{dx}v}

\int{\frac{2x+1}{x^2-x-6}}=\int{\frac{A}{x+2}+\frac{B}{x-3}}=\frac{1}{2}A\ln{(x+2)} - \frac{1}{3}B\ln{(x-3)}

\frac{dy}{dx}=\lambda y\Rightarrow\frac{dx}{dy}=\frac{1}{\lambda y}\Rightarrow x=\frac{1}{\lambda}\int{\frac{1}{y}dy}\Rightarrow x=\frac{1}{\lambda}\ln{(y)}+C

\Rightarrow\lambda x-C=\ln{y}\Rightarrow e^{\lambda x}\times e^{-C}=y\Rightarrow y=Ae^{\lambda x}

y=\sin^{-1}\frac{1}{6}x\Rightarrow \sin y=\frac{1}{6}x\Rightarrow 6\sin y=x\Rightarrow \frac{dx}{dy}=6\cos y

\Rightarrow \frac{dy}{dx} = \frac{1}{6 \cos y}

\Rightarrow = \frac{1}{6 \sqrt{1-\sin^{2}y}}

\Rightarrow = \frac{1}{6\sqrt{1-\frac{1}{36}x^2}}

\Rightarrow = \frac{1}{ \sqrt { 36 - x^2 }}

\int{x^3 \sqrt{3x^{4}-2} dx}

[Pattielli]

\overrightarrow{(S,U,N,N,I,E)}

[robphy]

\begin{picture}(100,100)(0,0)
\put(0,0){\circle{3}}
\put(0,0){\line(1,0){100}}
\put(0,0){\line(0,1){100}}
\put(100,100){\circle{3}}
\put(50,10){\circle{3}}
\put(55,15){{\bf test} label}
\end{picture}



\begin{picture}(200,200)(0,0)
\multiput(0,0)(50,0){5}{\line(0,1){200}}\multiput(0,0)(0,50){5}{\line(1,0){200}}
\end{picture}



\begin{picture}(200,200)(0,0)
\multiput(0,0)(40,10){5}{\line(1,4){40}}\multiput(0,0)(10,40){5}{\line(4,1){160}}
\end{picture}

[jcsd]

\left[x^2 -5x -6\right]_{0}^{1}

---------

[alexepascual]

I have not read the whole thread ( I apologize) and I am totally new to Latex.
Typing the latex and memorizing the language sounds like a lot of work. I wonder if there is any shareware or freeware program with which I can write the equations by drag and drop and have the program write the latex for me.
I'll appreciate your help.
--Alex--

[TALewis]

It's not really a whole lot of work. Start small and learn as you go. There are really only a handful of structures you need to know in order to get started. Learn by example: you can click on any equation posted in any thread and see what the person typed to create that image.

[Pattielli]

I have not read the whole thread ( I apologize) and I am totally new to Latex.
Typing the latex and memorizing the language sounds like a lot of work. I wonder if there is any shareware or freeware program with which I can write the equations by drag and drop and have the program write the latex for me.
I'll appreciate your help.
--Alex--
Another option I think may be the Equation Object included in WinWord which can also be somewhat similar help for you...(smiling)

[robphy]

Another option I think may be the Equation Object included in WinWord which can also be somewhat similar help for you...(smiling)

I believe that the Equation Editor does not export LaTeX.
One has to use MathType http://www.dessci.com/en/products/mathtype/.


Other LaTeX editors
WinEdt http://www.winedt.com/
WinTeX http://www.tex-tools.de/main.html
WinShell http://www.winshell.de/

Maple and Mathematica can also export LaTeX.

[alexepascual]

Thanks guys for your information,
MathType sounds interesting. But as it costs $119, I downloaded TeXaid (form the same company). I'll explore the other products when I have the time.
I am a little confused by the statement on some of these products that they are not a LaTex system. It appears that you need two pieces of software that will work in conjucntion but I still don't understand what each one does.
I think TexAid should allow me to produce LaTex code to paste into the forum.
When I register for classes in fall, I'll buy Mathematica at academic price.
Thanks again,
--Alex--

[ahrkron]

Before buying Mathematica, ask in your University about it. Many universities have campus-wide licenses that allow students to use Mathematica from the University's network, and it is often the case that such benefits are not "common knowledge" among students.

[rayjohn01]

garamond ( greek)undefinedundefined

This is just a trial Ραυ , αβψδεφγηιξκλμνοπ;ρστθωςχυζ

Ραυξοην01

[alexepascual]

Thanks for your information ahrkron.

[Alem2000]

\int_{2}^{3} \frac{\arctan}{\sqrt{a^2 + x^2}}dx

[Alem2000]

why the hell wont it work?

[jcsd]

$$........$$

[Alem2000]

\int_{2}^{3} \frac{\arctan}{\sqrt{a^2 + x^2}}dx
....lol....Thanks jcsd....that was a really dumb mistake :rofl:

[jcsd]

You need to produce your equation you need to write:

$$\int_{2}^{3} \frac{\arctan}{\sqrt{a^2 + x^2}}dx$$

[Alem2000]

yeah i got it...thanks a million...that was gonna drive me crazy :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Alem2000]

\lim_{x\rightarrow \0} \sumf(x)\Delta = \int_{a}^{b}f(x) dx

[Daevren]

Does anyone know how I can get this to work locally with windows. I downloaded a couple of programs and I didn't really get any of them to actually show the fomulas.


\int_{0}^{h} \frac{1}{2\sqrt{hx}} dx =
\frac{1}{2\sqrt{h}}(2x^\frac{1}{2}) \vert_{0}^{h} = 1

[robphy]

You'll need a LaTeX distribution (for example, www.miktex.org).
Basically, you take the latex file (file.tex) and run latex on it.
You get file.dvi, which can be viewed in a dvi viewer (called yap in miktex).

[Math Is Hard]

Hi, I am trying to use latex to display a math problem but I am having a little trouble getting started, and the function I want to display is a little bit weird.

I(x) = e^ (the integral of -tan x dx)

I am not even sure it can display an integral as an exponent, but I seem to be having plenty of trouble just getting it to display e!

Thanks in advance for your help! :smile:

[master_coda]

Hi, I am trying to use latex to display a math problem but I am having a little trouble getting started, and the function I want to display is a little bit weird.

I(x) = e^ (the integral of -tan x dx)

I am not even sure it can display an integral as an exponent, but I seem to be having plenty of trouble just getting it to display e!

Thanks in advance for your help! :smile:

I(x)=e^{-\int tanx\:dx}

[Math Is Hard]

woo hoo! muchas gracias, master coda!

[TALewis]

Or even better, use \tan to make the tangent function to appear in upright letters:

e^{- \int \tan x \, dx}

[master_coda]

I knew it didn't quite look right. And I was looking so smart, too. :tongue2:

[Math Is Hard]

They both look lovely. And it helped me get my math question answered. Thanks!

[alexepascual]

This is a test. I am pasting LaTex code from TexAide. Let's see if it works.
% MathType!MTEF!2!1!+-
% feqaeaartrvr0aaatCvAUfeBSjuyZL2yd9gzLbvyNv2CaerbuLwBLn
% hiov2DGi1BTfMBaeXatLxBI9gBaebbnrfifHhDYfgasaacH8srps0l
% bbf9q8WrFfeuY-Hhbbf9v8qqaqFr0xc9pk0xbba9q8WqFfea0-yr0R
% Yxir-Jbba9q8aq0-yq-He9q8qqQ8frFve9Fve9Ff0dmeaabaqaciGa
% caGaaeqabaaaamaaaOqaamaaEmaabaGaeqOXdygabaGaeuiQdKfaca
% GLPmIaay5bSlaawQYiaiabg2da9maapeaabaGaeqOXdy2aaWbaaSqa
% beaacqGHxiIkaaaabeqab0Gaey4kIipakmaabmaabaGaamiEaaGaay
% jkaiaawMcaaiabeI8a5naabmaabaGaamiEaaGaayjkaiaawMcaaiaa
% dsgacaWG4baaaa!46FB!
[latex]
\left\langle {\phi }
\mathrel{\left | {\vphantom {\phi \Psi }}
\right. \kern-\nulldelimiterspace}
{\Psi } \right\rangle = \int {\phi ^ * } \left( x \right)\psi \left( x \right)dx
[\latex]

[alexepascual]

OK, It didn't work.
I believe the text with percent signs at the beginning should be comments. I hope that is not interfeering.
But I do have the Latex code enclosed in the Latex delimiters. So, what's wrong?
I'll appreciate your help.
I'll next post just the LaTex part (to reduce the number of variables) and see what happens.

[alexepascual]

Second trial:
[latex]
\left\langle {\phi }
\mathrel{\left | {\vphantom {\phi \Psi }}
\right. \kern-\nulldelimiterspace}
{\Psi } \right\rangle = \int {\phi ^ * } \left( x \right)\psi \left( x \right)dx
[\latex]

[tex]\alpha[\tex]
[tex]x^2\sqrt{x}[\tex]

[chroot]

Alex,

The tags are [ tex ] and [ /tex ], not [ tex ] and [ \tex ]. Forward slash, not backslash.

- Warren

[alexepascual]

Thanks, Warren
Let's see:

\left\langle {\phi }
\mathrel{\left | {\vphantom {\phi \Psi }}
\right. \kern-\nulldelimiterspace}
{\Psi } \right\rangle = \int {\phi ^ * } \left( x \right)\psi \left( x \right)dx

Great!

[Loren Booda]

When I "preview post" to check my code, I am only allowed to preview once. Otherwise, the preview does not change. Because of this, I have been reverting to "post" all over again. What can I do?

[chroot]

It's your browser, not the site. Tell it to stop caching images that way.

- Warren

[flexten]

This is a test

[ tex ]
\nabla \times A = \left( {{{\partial A_z } \over {\partial y}} - {{\partial A_y } \over {\partial z}}} \right)i + \left( {{{\partial A_x } \over {\partial z}} - {{\partial A_z } \over {\partial x}}} \right)j + \left( {{{\partial A_y } \over {\partial x}} - {{\partial A_x } \over {\partial y}}} \right)k
[ /tex ]

[flexten]

Another, cause it sure isn't working yet from MathType:

\[
\nabla \times A = \left( {\frac{{\partial A_z }}{{\partial y}} - \frac{{\partial A_y }}{{\partial z}}} \right)i + \left( {\frac{{\partial A_x }}{{\partial z}} - \frac{{\partial A_z }}{{\partial x}}} \right)j + \left( {\frac{{\partial A_y }}{{\partial x}} - \frac{{\partial A_x }}{{\partial y}}} \right)k
\]


Maybe i got it !


\[
\nabla \times \,A = \frac{1}{{rsin\theta }}\left[ {\frac{{\partial (A_\phi sin\theta )}}{{\partial \theta }} - \frac{{\partial A_\theta }}{{\partial \phi }}} \right]\hat r + \frac{1}{r}\left[ {\frac{1}{{sin\theta }}\frac{{\partial A_r }}{{\partial \phi }} - \frac{{\partial (rA_\phi )}}{{\partial r}}} \right]\hat \theta + \frac{1}{r}\left[ {\frac{{\partial (rA_\theta )}}{{\partial r}} - \frac{{\partial A_r }}{{\partial \theta }}} \right]\hat \phi
\]


Cool ! But there seems to be a limit on width. I just type it into MathType
and choose the LaTeX 2 translator, then add latex in front and /latex
after (both in []), it works ! kinda.

[robphy]

When I "preview post" to check my code, I am only allowed to preview once. Otherwise, the preview does not change. Because of this, I have been reverting to "post" all over again. What can I do?

To preview beyond the first time, [on IE6] I do a "refresh". It tells me that it has to resend information in the forms. When I say okay, the images are refreshed to reflect the latest TeX-rendering changes.

[semiphor]

\eq x = \frac{-b \pm \sqrt{b^2-4ac} } {2a}


...wow - cool!

[maverick280857]

Just out of curiosity...whats the backend for conversion? Is it open source (I haven't seen the documentation in detail)?

Cheers
Vivek

[Hurkyl]

We have color?


\textcolor{red}{Test}
\begin{picture}(200,200)(0,0)
\put(50,50){\textcolor{green}{\line(1,1){50}}}
\end{picture}

[ahrkron]

\begin{picture}(130,90)
\put(0,5){\epsfxsize=12cm \epsfbox{11.eps}}
\put(0,90){$\tau_{B_c} $, ps}
\put(123,7){$\mu$, GeV}
\end{picture}

[alexepascual]

This is a test.
This is not Latex. Just trying to see how to do greek letters and subscripts in regular html.
α_i
Let's see how it looks.

Well, it didn't work. I have seen other people typing formulas without latex and I wonder how they do it.
What shows as "a" above I typed concatenating "&" "alpha" ";"
Does anybody know how to do this? I know how to do it in latex, I just want to know how to do it without latex.
I'll appreciate your help.

[robphy]

Like this?
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

[FONT = Symbol] abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz [ /FONT ] delete the spaces in the tags.

Symbol does not appear in the Font-menu.

[TALewis]

Bear in mind that not everybody has the Symbol font, and even if you do, it doesn't work everywhere because of certain issues.

[alexepascual]

Robphy:
I think that way of doing it would be adequate for typing a string of greek characters. I am not so sure it is for typing individual characters interspersed with regular letters as in physics equations.
I used to know how to do this and I forgot. But the way I did it was not the way you suggest.
I also need to do subscripts an superscripts.

I was looking at the Font drop-down box and I don't see the font "symbol". Maybe this is what TALewis is talking about. I do have the symbol font when I am using MS Word, but not here. So I guess these fonts are not handled by the operating system. Whatever the solution, I would like of course for everybody to be able to see those greek letters correctly.

[TALewis]

Math typesetting on the WWW has been one of the most frustrating things I have come across. Honestly, embedded images generated by LaTeX have been the best solution until something like MathML really gets into gear.

[alexepascual]

Thank you guys,
As answers to my question on this thread were slow to come at first and I figured that it might not be the best place to post a question about non-latex on a latex thread, I initiated a separate thread. I got more answers there and I think with those instructions I can do what I want. TALewis was very helpful on that thread.
Let's see if I can post a link to that thread:
Typing equations without latex (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=33515)

[Loren Booda]

chrootIt's your browser, not the site. Tell it to stop caching images that way. Would you mind going into more detail about "stop caching images" for this computer illiterate? My browser is Microsoft Explorer 6.0. Thanks.

[Tom D]

...
If you have questions or comments about this site addition, you are welcome to post them here!

Good luck, and enjoy the system.

- Warren

This is a most excellent welcome back ! Thank you.( I have been too busy to surf recently ).

[JonF]

\frac{3^{2/3}}{3x^{1/3}*((3x)^{2/3}+2)^{1/2}}

[JonF]

2\pi\int_{2}^{4} (3x^{2/3} +2)^{1/2}*(1 + (\frac{3^{2/3}}{3x^{1/3}*((3x)^{2/3}+2)^{1/2}})^2)^{1/2} dx

[speeding electron]

How do you write the sign for a line integral around a closed curve?

[chroot]

\oint f(x) dx

- Warren

[gerben]

How do you get multiple lines?
I have been trying for hours.
I can only could get multiple lines that were indented to random amount by using "\begin{multline} .....\end{multline}".
just using "//" does not seem to work.

[chroot]

gerben,

There are several ways. Examples of all these ways are provided on the first page of this thread. Click the images below to see their source code:


\begin{multline*}
a+b+c+d\\
+e+f+g+h
\end{multline*}



\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
a+b+c+d\\
+e+f+g+h
\end{split}
\end{equation*}



\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&a+b+c+d\\
&+e+f+g+h
\end{split}
\end{equation*}



\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
a+b&+c+d\\
+e+f+g&+h
\end{split}
\end{equation*}