Take the 2-minute tour ×
TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. It's 100% free, no registration required.

For example:

\begin{equation}
\delta % ok
\Delta % ok
\epsilon % ok
\Epsilon % error
\end{equation}
share|improve this question
    
I also ran into this problem today. The capital letter $E$ is not what I wanted. I wanted the symbol $\mathcal{E}$. –  OSE Nov 11 '13 at 0:40
add comment

5 Answers

up vote 15 down vote accepted

Uppercase epsilon is E.

\begin{equation}
\delta % ok
\Delta % ok
\epsilon % ok
E        % ok
\end{equation}
share|improve this answer
6  
wow and i thought c++ was inconsistent –  bada Aug 9 '10 at 0:34
1  
Yeah, as much as I love LaTeX for its typesetting skill, it makes so little sense internally. –  David Z Aug 9 '10 at 0:54
3  
unicode-math has \Alpha, etc. defined, so this will be more consistent in the future. –  Caramdir Aug 9 '10 at 14:54
2  
The uppercase epsilon is E, so I don't see how this is inconsistent. This visual similarity (identicalness, actually) is a feature of the scripts themselves: what would you expect from an "uppercase epsilon" if not the letter E? –  ShreevatsaR Aug 10 '10 at 22:08
8  
I think this is one to learn from for LaTeX3: on semantic grounds there should be a macro here, even though in the default fonts it doesn't show up visually. –  Joseph Wright Aug 12 '10 at 19:28
add comment

Well, my wild guess is that such macros are missing because CM has no such glyphs to begin with, Knuth's Greek is meant for use in math and not for running text and thus there were no point in duplicating glyphs that are visually indistinguishable from Latin counterparts.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Other answers have made this fairly clear: a capital epsilon is identical to a capital E, so there's no need for a separate LaTeX command. However, there is a point missing from the answers above. Roman letters (by which I mean letters from the Roman alphabet) are conventionally set italic in math mode, to make clearer the distinction between maths and text. But Greek letters are set upright by default (though some journals deviate), because there's no distinction that needs making (assuming you're not writing in Greek). So if you really want a capital epsilon, and you want a consistent look for all your capital Greek letters, you should use \mathrm{E}.

share|improve this answer
    
That's not true. The Greek letters are typeset italic. There's a package to typeset them upright: upgreek –  TH. Nov 24 '10 at 1:00
    
Hmm, that's strange; mine are definitely upright, and I can't imagine that I'm calling upgreek without knowing it. Could this be a result of font selection? –  Matt Fayers Nov 24 '10 at 22:20
    
Check this at section 5. –  pmav99 Apr 12 '11 at 8:47
add comment

David's point is worth underlining:

So basically, nobody would use a capital epsilon in a formula because it'd be visually indistinguishable from E.

If you wanted to type something actually in Greek, then you would use one of the packages designed for that (search on CTAN for "greek" to get an idea of what's available). The Greek letters that are defined in unadorned LaTeX should not be viewed as letters but as mathematical symbols. So α should be viewed in the same regard as something like ≤. This is underlined by their appearance: just as "x" looks different in text and in maths, so "α" will look different in text and in maths. So the fact that "Α" (\Alpha) and the like are missing is simply because regarded as a symbol, it's just "A", and no-one would ever write \Alpha because they can just write A and the fact of calling it "Alpha" adds nothing. Compare this with "x" (x) and "×" (\times) where the different names actually mean something (variable versus operator).

So, in summary, if you want to type \Epsilon and the system complains then you are doing something wrong: either you are trying to type something in Greek without loading a proper Greek alphabet, or you are distinguishing in the source code something that will be indistinguishable in the actual document.

share|improve this answer
add comment

To quote from The LaTeX Companion (p. 527),

Those capital Greek letters not present in this table are the letters that have the same appearance as some Latin letter. Similarly, the list of lowercase Greek letters contains no omicron because it would be identical in appearance to the Latin o. Thus, in practice, the Greek letters that have Latin look-alikes are not used in mathematical formulas.

So basically, nobody would use a capital epsilon in a formula because it'd be visually indistinguishable from E.

If this bothers you, you could define the missing macros for Greek letters, e.g.

\newcommand{\Alpha}{A}
\newcommand{\Beta}{B}
\newcommand{\Epsilon}{E}

and so on.

share|improve this answer
2  
I remember in a class on spinor methods discovering with some alarm that the basis spinors were denoted omicron and iota, with the two components denoted by super- and sub-script 0 and 1. Since the spinors were indexed by capitals, it made a page of $o_0^{A'} \iota_A^1$, handwritten, rather challenging to re-read. When the lecturer remarked in an aside that this was a rather exquisite in-joke, he only narrowly escaped being collectively throttled by the class. –  Norman Gray Aug 9 '10 at 8:37
    
My measure theory lecturer wanted to use $\mathbb{C}$ for something other than the complex numbers, but we shouted him down. There were still at least 4 near-indistinguishable "M"s... –  Seamus Apr 2 '11 at 15:13
1  
Use \providecommand instead, that way it's forward compatible in case these commands are defined in the future. –  Jonathan Baldwin Oct 1 '13 at 5:13
    
Except, of course, for the Beta function, the H theorem, and certain Gegenbauer functions. –  episanty Jan 17 at 19:17
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.