# LATEX died again!

Gold Member
Well, once again someone recently did a 'New and Improved' iteration of Latex and broke it, at least on older browsers.
I've cleared the browser cache (>10 000 files) and refreshed the page, all to no avail.

Mentor
Latex implementation is independent - that is, PF is just a "user" of an external tool, implemented and hosted elsewhere, and these upgrades are automatic (I am not seven sure they can be switched off at our side). So as far as I am aware all @Greg Bernhardt can do is to report a problem up.

Looks like 3.2.1 came out on the 19th. https://www.mathjax.org/MathJax-v3.2.1-available/

Is anyone else having issues? @Tom.G what browser and version are you on again? MathJax employs some very heavy CSS which works best with newish browsers.

Mentor
Is anyone else having issues?
I haven't had any problems. I'm on Win 10 with Edge as the browser.

Greg Bernhardt
Mentor
Well, once again someone recently did a 'New and Improved' iteration of Latex and broke it, at least on older browsers.
I've cleared the browser cache (>10 000 files) and refreshed the page, all to no avail.
Can you post the LaTeX here that seems broken for you?

Gold Member
As I said, older browsers. Firefox 43.0.1, and Mypal 23.13.0 which is a later fork of Firefox and works on Almost all websites. Also old is Win XP Pro, 32 bit.

Your major update of the site several months ago broke my ability to make posts at the time and really messed up the menu in the posting editor. That prompted my use of the Mypal browser. Fortunately those problems were eventually corrected.

Here are links to two examples, each followed by a copy-&paste of the displayed text which I enclosed here in [ ICODE ], [ /ICODE ]

EXAMPLE 1:
https://www.physicsforums.com/posts/6623801

"The equation F in BSL table 19.2-4 and Exercise 19D.2 seem to suggest that Cp should be evaluated at the existing overall molar composition as ##\sum{y_iC_{P,i}}##. I should also point out that, in BSL, the molar flux is defined in terms of the mass transfer coefficient by $$\dot{M}_i^"=k_i\left(y_i-\frac{p_i(T)}{P}\right)$$ where ##k_i## has units of moles/m^2s. Under these definitions, the Sherwood number for a porous medium (for use in conjunction with the correlation equation) would be defined as $$\frac{k_iD_p}{(1-\epsilon)cD_i\psi}$$ where, in BSL notation, $$c=\rho_{m}=\frac{P}{RT_I}$$ BSL point out that ##cD_i## is much less dependent on temperature than ##D_i##."

EXAMPLE 2:
https://www.physicsforums.com/posts/6624526
"I have successfully done first order equations before but this one has got me a little stuck. My attempt at the general solution below: $${5} \frac{\text{d}\theta}{\text{d}t}=-6\theta$$ $${5} \frac{\text{d}\theta}{\text{d}t} =\frac{\text{-6}\theta}{5}$$ $$d\theta = \frac{-6\theta}{5} dt$$ The integral should then = $$\theta = \frac{1}{5} in(5)$$ $$\theta = -6 \times (\frac{1}{5}) in (5) + c$$"

Thanks,
Tom

Homework Helper
Gold Member
Windows XP is not "old", it is completely and utterly dead and was buried eight years ago. You need to replace it with an OS that will run current browser releases.

Mentor
Hm, as far as I am aware XP is the last Windows version that got security approval from FSB RF, which is why it is still used by Russian gov.

@Tom.G - is there something you forgot to tell us about?

Wrichik Basu, Astronuc, mfb and 2 others
Mentor

Works fine for me on my old Windows Vista PC with Firefox 52.9.0:

Astronuc
Works fine for me on my old Windows Vista PC with Firefox 52.9.0:
Looks like FF 52.9 (this will be a significant update!) and Chrome 49 are the latest versions for XP which you can update to.

Tom.G
Gold Member
Thanks!

I have downloaded and will investigate to see how many of the dozen-plus plug-ins I use are compatible and which internal setting need modifying. (If I can figure it all out again, IIRC some are a bit touchy. )

Of course from my viewpoint, it would be easier if MathJax was fixed, just as the posting editor and its menu were previously.

If I disappear for a while you will know why!

Tom

Homework Helper
Gold Member
I have downloaded and will investigate to see how many of the dozen-plus plug-ins I use are compatible and which internal setting need modifying.
You are using a dozen plug-ins from unspecified authors on an unsupported and insecure version of Firefox running on an unsupported and insecure version of Windows? I suppose next you are going to say you aren't aware of out-of-band security patches such as the Security Update for Windows XP SP3 (KB4500331)?

Why do you think that this is a good idea? What would it take to persuade you otherwise?

Mentor
Why do you think that this is a good idea?
I don't know Tom's reason for still using XP, but we do have a handful of old PCs here in the lab still running XP because we have some legacy tools and applications that only run on that old OS. We are not allowed to plug them into the building network, however, since IT obviously considers them a security risk.

Staff Emeritus
We are not allowed to plug them into the building network
I got to just that sentence, thinking "I hope to heaven they don't have this on the internet".

I used to work with a piece of equipment that had a rack PC running DOS. DOS! Ancient, but not insecure - how would you ever connect it to a network?

Mentor
how would you ever connect it to a network?
Like this?

anorlunda, BillTre and berkeman
Staff Emeritus
Yes. An acoustic modem and Kermit, you could even run Gopher for internet stuff.

Mentor
Gopher
I remember that. Now I feel old.

anorlunda
Staff Emeritus