Tips for Solving Typesetting Problems in LaTeX

  • Thread starter Thread starter tomfitzyuk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Typesetting
AI Thread Summary
Typesetting in LaTeX can be challenging, particularly for custom layouts. The user seeks advice on achieving a specific formatting style for equations and enumerations, expressing frustration with the current complexity of their code. They share examples of desired and current layouts, highlighting the need for better alignment of equations with list items. Suggestions for improvement focus on simplifying the code and enhancing visual organization. Effective solutions for typesetting in LaTeX can significantly streamline the formatting process.
tomfitzyuk
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Hey,

I'm trying to learn how to use LaTeX and while I think it's easy how to form equations and symbols, the thing I find most difficult is laying things out how I'd prefer.

I wanted it to look like this but couldn't work out how to do it, if anybody has any tips, examples, tutorials or book recommendations, please post them.

http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/7452/hmm6lw.jpg

BTW, the vertical line is not supposed to be there, please ignore it.

Thanks in Advance
Tom
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Assuming you are doing this in a .tex file (not on a forum), the code would look like this:

$\begin{enumerate}\item\begin{enumerate}\item Type what you want here for part 1a.\item 1b goes here...\end{enumerate}\item Now you're on 2\begin{enumerate}\item 2a is here\end{enumerate}\end{enumerate}$
 
Thanks for the reply, what you posted enabled me to be able to do a lot but it's not my most preferred layout, is this possible?

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/4580/example7kf.jpg

The lines just show how I would prefer it to be aligned. In particular I would want the equation to start on the line of the item.

My code is:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $ z_1 = 1 + i \\
z_2 = 2 - 3i \\
z_3 = 4 + 4i $

\item[i.]
\begin{eqnarray*}
z_1 + z_2 + z_3 &=& (1 + i) + (2 - 3i) + (4 + 4i) \\
&=& 7 + 2i
\end{eqnarray*}

\item[ii.]
\begin{eqnarray*}
2z_1 + 4z_3 &=& 2(1 + i) + 4(4 + 4i) \\
&=& 2 + 2i + 16 + 16i \\
&=& 18 + 18i
\end{eqnarray*}

\item[iii.]
\begin{eqnarray*}
z_3 - z_1 &=& (4 + 4i) - (1 + i) \\
&=& 3 + 3i
\end{eqnarray*}

\end{enumerate}

Which I think is quite inefficient (too much typing per equation, I don't mean the symbols, the whole formatting of each equation, maybe this is just what LaTeX is like) and not to my liking.

Does anybody have any tips?

Thanks in Advance
Tom
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top