- #1
- 3,873
- 3,484
Is there a better way to get fractions to display like ## \rm{(a+b)/(c+d)}## instead of ## \frac{a+b}{c+d}##? Sometimes I'd like LaTex to do formatting "inside" the fraction; let's say with an integral symbol, for example.
For that, you do not need to use the LaTex frac. You can just type it in. I have never had a problem nesting LaTex formats, but I am not a "power user".DaveE said:Is there a better way to get fractions to display like ## \rm{(a+b)/(c+d)}## instead of ## \frac{a+b}{c+d}##? Sometimes I'd like LaTex to do formatting "inside" the fraction; let's say with an integral symbol, for example.
I might not have either . I may need to experiment more.fresh_42 said:I'm not sure I understood the question. Where exactly is the problem?
Yes, I think you're right. This stuff isn't so bad. Unless you think it's supposed to make sense, LOL.FactChecker said:Or the answer is so simple that we don't know what more to say. Just type it in. If you have an example of a problem with nested LaTex formats, maybe someone can help. You may need to backslash some special characters for LaTex to take them literally.
Are you happy with that? It seems to be a natural consequence of what you asked for, although I would recommend that you at least enclose the numerator and denominator in parenthesis to make it clearer. But you would also have to do that if you wrote it by hand.DaveE said:Yes, I think you're right. This stuff isn't so bad. Unless you think it's supposed to make sense, LOL.
## \sum_{n=0}^\infty a_n x^n ## / ## \int_0^t H(t-\tau) \, d\tau ##
## \int_0^t \frac{sin(t-\tau)}{(t-\tau)} \, d\tau ## / ##
\begin{vmatrix}
1 & 2 & 3 & 4 \\
a & b & c & d \\
x & y & z & w
\end{vmatrix} ##
Or even easier (and I think better to read) ...FactChecker said:Are you happy with that? It seems to be a natural consequence of what you asked for, although I would recommend that you at least enclose the numerator and denominator in parenthesis to make it clearer. But you would also have to do that if you wrote it by hand.
If you want the forward slash to be larger, you can use \big, \Big, \bigg, and \Bigg in LaTex to make progressively larger slashes. This is \Bigg:
## \int_0^t \frac{sin(t-\tau)}{(t-\tau)} \, d\tau \Bigg /
\begin{vmatrix}
1 & 2 & 3 & 4 \\
a & b & c & d \\
x & y & z & w
\end{vmatrix} ##
Nope. That's the normal (i.e. good) way to format these, LOL.fresh_42 said:Do you mean something like that?
$$
\dfrac{ \displaystyle{\sum_{n=0}^\infty a_n x^n }}{ \displaystyle{\int_0^t H(t-\tau) \, d\tau }}
$$
$$ \dfrac{ \displaystyle{\int_0^t \dfrac{sin(t-\tau)}{(t-\tau)} \, d\tau }}{
\det\left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 2 & 3 & 4 \\
a & b & c & d \\
x & y & z & w
\end{matrix}\right)}$$
I think this is as good as it can get. I didn't really know about \big, thanks.FactChecker said:Are you happy with that? It seems to be a natural consequence of what you asked for, although I would recommend that you at least enclose the numerator and denominator in parenthesis to make it clearer. But you would also have to do that if you wrote it by hand.
If you want the forward slash to be larger, you can use \big, \Big, \bigg, and \Bigg in LaTex to make progressively larger slashes. This is \Bigg:
## \int_0^t \frac{sin(t-\tau)}{(t-\tau)} \, d\tau \Bigg /
\begin{vmatrix}
1 & 2 & 3 & 4 \\
a & b & c & d \\
x & y & z & w
\end{vmatrix} ##
Yes, these are better. The example was arbitrary and stupid just to show a more complex problem than ##\frac{a}{b}##.fresh_42 said:Or even easier (and I think better to read) ...
$$
\begin{vmatrix}
1 & 2 & 3 & 4 \\
a & b & c & d \\
x & y & z & w
\end{vmatrix}^{-1} \displaystyle{\int_0^t \dfrac{sin(t-\tau)}{(t-\tau)} \, d\tau}
$$
... if not even define ##A^{-1}:=
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 2 & 3 & 4 \\
a & b & c & d \\
x & y & z & w
\end{pmatrix}## and write ##
\displaystyle{\int_0^t |\det(A)|\dfrac{sin(t-\tau)}{(t-\tau)} \, d\tau}## which immediately refers to the transformation theorem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integration_by_substitution#Substitution_for_multiple_variables
You are not alone. When I am doing anything slightly complicated in LaTex I end up Googling it. Even if I know a trick today, next week I will have to Google it again. :-) I had to Google this to answer your question.DaveE said:I think this is as good as it can get. I didn't really know about \big, thanks.
I have loaded my keyboard with 67 shortcuts. As a result, I use these all the time rather than learning new ones. And if, as your useful big-enlargements, I'll probably forget them again.FactChecker said:You are not alone. When I am doing anything slightly complicated in LaTex I end up Googling it. Even if I know a trick today, next week I will have to Google it again. :-) I had to Google this to answer your question.