Tag Info

New answers tagged

10

In my view, it's abusing the math environment to use it only to make superscript and subscript numbers in a context that is not math. So I would use \textsuperscript and \textsubscript instead. \documentclass{article} \usepackage{fixltx2e} \renewcommand{\familydefault}{\sfdefault} \begin{document} 10\textsuperscript{5} and CO\textsubscript{2}. ...


5

A variant with package siunitx for numbers and units (with font detection) and mhchem for chemical formulas: \documentclass{article} \renewcommand{\familydefault}{\sfdefault} \usepackage[version=3]{mhchem} \usepackage{siunitx} \begin{document} \num{e5} and \ce{CO2}. \end{document}


1

Use sfmath package here. \documentclass{article} \renewcommand{\familydefault}{\sfdefault} \usepackage{sfmath} \begin{document} 10$^5$ and CO$_2$. \end{document}


5

Those are the fonts used in math mode. Using mathsf you can switch to a sans serif math font. On the other hand, there are packages like siunitx and chemformula that ease the input significantly. \documentclass{article} \renewcommand{\familydefault}{\sfdefault} \usepackage{siunitx} \usepackage{chemformula} \begin{document} 10$^5$ and CO$_2$.\par ...


14

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 ...


0

The original picture can be reproduced by \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \begin{document} \[ \frac{(-1)^{\varphi(n)/2}n^{\varphi(n)}} {\prod_{p\mid n} p^{\varphi(n)/(p-1)}} \] \end{document} whereas using \Pi instead of \prod would give which is sensibly different. If the condition is desired to be under the product sign, the ...


0

I solved my problem using the selected answer to this question: Superscript page numbers with natbib If your're reading this, I finally managed to succeed in a half-hour long journey through unsolvable captchas, buggy captcha-widgets and hijacking attempts on my clipboard that forced my to re-copy the link on every of my ~10 attempts to post this.


1

If you can cope with a bit of plain TeX syntax, you can just do this. Put $a$ over $b$: $a \atop b$


1

Just to give the OP different options, here I show the basic features of the stackengine approach to stacking, with the first column as a \stackon, the second as a \stackunder and the third as a \stackanchor. The first row uses "short" stacks, in which the gap between the top of one element and the bottom of the element above it are fixed, whereas the ...


1

Does it serves for the purpose? $_{b}^{a}$ Output:


-2

I use $n^{\text{th}}$. It seems to work okay for me.



Top 50 recent answers are included