Easy Tips for Bold Text in LaTeX | Learn How to Bold Text in LaTeX

  • Context: LaTeX 
  • Thread starter Thread starter member 428835
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Latex
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around methods for bolding text and symbols in LaTeX, particularly focusing on the challenges associated with bolding Greek letters in mathematical contexts. Participants explore various approaches, including the use of specific packages and commands.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant reports difficulty using \textbf{pi} and \textbf{\pi}, receiving unexpected results and errors.
  • Another participant explains that \pi works in math mode and suggests using $\bm{\pi}$ or $\boldsymbol{\pi}$ with appropriate packages for bold Greek letters.
  • A later reply challenges the assertion that standard LaTeX lacks bold lowercase Greek letters, proposing that \boldmath can be used but has limitations, such as affecting all math in bold.
  • Further discussion reveals uncertainty about the definition and functionality of \boldmath, with one participant noting its absence from the index of Knuth's TeXBook and questioning its reliability across different TeX versions.
  • Participants express frustration with the design choices in LaTeX regarding bolding, particularly in mixing bold and non-bold characters in math formulas.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach consensus on the capabilities of standard LaTeX regarding bold Greek letters, with multiple competing views on the effectiveness and usability of \boldmath and the necessity of additional packages.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the potential for confusion regarding the definitions and implementations of commands like \boldmath, as well as the impact of different TeX versions on functionality.

member 428835
hi pf!

can someone help me bold in latex. for some reason if i use \textbf{pi} if get ##\textbf {pi}## but if i use \textbf {\pi} i do not get a bold ##\pi## but only an error. i have also tried \bfseries and no luck.

please help! thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
\pi only works in math node, e.g. $\pi$. \textbf only works in text mode (as you might guess from the name).

But "standard" LaTeX doesn't have bold lower case Greek letters anyway, so you have to do something like

Code:
\usepackage{bm}
...
$\bm{\pi}$
or if you are using the AMS math package,
Code:
\usepackage{amsbsy}
...
$\boldsymbol{\pi}$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: member 428835
thanks a ton!
 
AlephZero said:
But "standard" LaTeX doesn't have bold lower case Greek letters anyway
That's actually incorrect. All math symbols can be set in bold in LaTeX, but in very contrived way. You have to activate \boldmath, but then all math will be typeset in bold! The way around that is something like
Code:
\mbox{\boldmath $\pi$}
such that the \boldmath will only affect equations inside the mbox. If you want just one bold symbol in an equation, you have to use the awful construct
Code:
$2 \alpha \mbox{\boldmath $\beta$}$
LaTeX being so well thought out from a typographical point of view, I don't know why they messed up with bold.

Anyway, the conclusion is that it is better to use the additional packages you suggested.
 
DrClaude said:
That's actually incorrect.

After a bit of research, I agree with you. There are plenty of statements on (usually reputable) websites that \boldmath is "part of plain TeX". But it's not in the index of Knuth's TeXBook, and those statements seem to be wrong.

It is defined in the "base" TeX code of LaTeX. It's not quite obvious how it's defined but it looks like it redefines all the math font names to bold versions. That may not work with all math fonts, or with newer versions of TeX that handle fonts in a completely different way (e.g. direct access to Unicode and/or the internals of Open Type fonts).

And as you say, \boldmath is not nice to use, if you want to mix bold and non-bold characters in the same math formula.

LaTeX being so well thought out from a typographical point of view
It was very well thought out, and forward looking, when it was first released. But that was 36 years ago. With hindsight, too many implementation-specific details were hard-wired into it - like the fact that it was designed to run on 16-bit computer hardware, not 64-bit.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K