# Tag Info

1

Don't use $$, it's plain-TeX syntax and does not have the flexibility, for example, to move the equations automatically to the left. Don't use$$, ... Don't use $$, ... The formatting of$$ is hard-coded in TeX, thus to change its behavior for automatic left-aligning, the source code of TeX needs to be changed. With extra TeX code, also $$...$$ can be ...

1

Is fleqn what you are looking for? (By the way, I rewrote the code in a more clear way, at least to me) \documentclass[fleqn]{scrartcl} \usepackage{mathtools,amssymb} \usepackage{kantlipsum} % Just for this example (the \kant command) \begin{document} \kant*[1] $f(x) = \frac{\sin^2 x \cos x}{\sin x + \cos x} - \frac{1}{4} ... 0 There is another package for this task not yet mentioned: stackrel. It adds an optional argument to the LaTeX \stackrel command to set something below the relation, as in \usepackage{stackrel} \usepackage{amssymb} \stackrel[c]{e}{\leftrightarrows} 1 Are you using the arrows to show a chemical reaction? Then you might be interested in knowing that you can use the mhchem package which simplifies writing reactions. It gives the same result as Amar's code but you don't have to include all the extra definitions yourself. I used the option arrows=pgf to get arrow heads more like the ones in your picture. ... 2 Here is another solution with tikz-cd: % arara: pdflatex \documentclass{article} \usepackage{tikz-cd} \begin{document} \[ \begin{tikzcd} A \arrow[shift left=2pt]{r}{e} & B\arrow[shift left=2pt]{l}{c} \end{tikzcd}$ \end{document} And yet another one with unicode-math and substack: % arara: lualatex \documentclass{article} ...

1

I have found five possible ways to do this, out of which 2 match your requirements; however, the arrows are not extensible in those! Further information can be found in the code itself. Note: No matter which method you choose the alignment just isn't right in all of them! \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{amssymb} ...

2

This may not be the best solution (spacing seems off to me), but you can turn \leftrightarrows into a math operator and turn on limits: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amssymb} \newcommand\weird{\mathop\leftrightarrows\limits} \begin{document} $\weird^3_f$ \end{document}

0

To follow-up the discussion in the comments of David Carlisle's answer about the unicode-math package: In LaTeX, there are two fonts in math mode: one for letters (variables), usually called math font (better called math letter font); one for words, usually called math text font (better called math word font), and one text font in text mode, usually ...

2

\documentclass{scrartcl} \usepackage{mathtools,mleftright} \mleftright % Or comment this line and use \mleft and \mright instead \begin{document} $f\left(x\right)$ $\arg\left(z\right)$ $e^{i\arg\left(z\right)}$ \end{document}

5

The following example redefines \vdots and \ddots to get a resizable version according to the current math style. The vertical space between the dots is taken from the horizontal dots. Also the dots in \ddots match the vertical spacing of \vdots and the horizontal spacing of the horizontal dots in \cdots. \cdots adds a thin space at the right side. For a ...

2


1

I have found that Latex has a symbol for a star which is the command \bigstar. http://latex.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_LaTeX_symbols So using the follow the $\mathbf{A}_k^{\bigstar}$ produce $$\mathbf{A}_k^{\bigstar}$$

4

MWE: \documentclass[11pt]{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} \begin{equation*} Q = \begin{pmatrix} -(\lambda_1 + \mu_1) & \lambda_1 & 0 & \ldots & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & -(\lambda_2 + \mu_2) & \lambda_2 & \ldots & 0 & 0 \\ \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ldots & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 ...

3

you should really have posted these as two separate questions, instead of adding on to the first. but you could try \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} $$\mathbf{q}=(\mu_1, \mu_2, \ldots ,\mu_{n-2}, \mu_n )^{\text{T}} \label{2}$$ and L = \log(l) = ...

5


17

in latex.ltx there is a line \let\sp=^ so there is an alternate command, \sp, that will produce a superscript. @egreg notes in a comment that this isn't available for mathjax, so it's apparently not "portable". however, david cervone (mathjax lead developer) says that MathJax does handle \let\sp=^ [...]. MathJax's \let only works to set a control ...

1

\documentclass{article} \begin{document} $\in \mbox{and} \ni$ \end{document} The symbol can be found in "Table 139: Letter-like Symbols" of The Comprehensive LaTeX Symbol List.

4

Try this: \documentclass{beamer} \usefonttheme[onlymath]{serif} \begin{document} \begin{frame} Here goes the text $x + y = Z$ \end{frame} \end{document}

3

Define a new symbol font using the font of newtxmath and tell TeX to take \gamma from it. \documentclass{article} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage{tgtermes} \usepackage{amsmath,amsfonts} \usepackage[zswash,lite]{mtpro2} \usepackage{bm} \DeclareSymbolFont{newtxletters}{OML}{ntxmi}{m}{it} \SetSymbolFont{newtxletters}{bold}{OML}{ntxmi}{b}{it} ...

21

TeX will not break a line at the “control space”, because it's allowed to break lines in formulas only after binary operators such as + or =. Glue in math mode is not an allowed break point. The spaces in $a,\ b$, and $c$ will be different, because TeX adds a thin space between a punctuation atom (the comma) and an ordinary atom (the ‘b’), independently ...

28

Yes it matters. In the first case the comma is from the math font, and depending on your math setup can be different from the text font. So you should make sure that all commas are either from text or math and not mixed. Which one is better depends on the context, in a normal sentence I would use the text comma. \documentclass{article} ...

8

The use of math alphabet commands in unicode-math is somewhat broken there are open issues at github which mentions \mathit but \mathrm is the same. You can redefine \mathrm to use the Roman text font as follows: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{unicode-math} \setmathfont{Latin Modern Math} \setmathfont[range=\mathup]{Latin Modern Roman} ...

1


1

It's not related to the problem in the referenced question, there large entries were tight to the surrounding rows and the answer made sure that the spacing strut in those rows was larger than the entry thus preserving row separation but making the row separation more variable. It would not do anything here as the later rows are not large. Here (I think) ...

5

the two symbols aren't in the same class, so they'll invariably get some space in between. to turn an operator or a relation into an "ordinary" character, wrap it in braces. then, combine them and wrap the whole thing in braces, applying \mathbin or \mathrel as appropriate: \documentclass{article} \begin{document} \[ a \mathbin{{+}{=}} b \mathrel{{=}{+}} ...

Top 50 recent answers are included