This is such a beautiful textbook; very dear to me. I think it has a great font - which I know is Times New Roman. But somehow, I can't even get close to it. One of the main obstacles is making the font thicker somehow. Anyways, here is a sample page. If anyone can translate it into TeX, I'd be impressed.

enter image description here

P.S. The main issue is to somehow make the Times New Roman font a little thicker. Here is my attempt - is there any way to make this look a little less corny?:

enter image description here

  • Welcome to TeX.SE! Please also add the code you've written to create the excerpt you've posted. Useful answers to font-related questions will depend importantly on features such as the font family (or families) you're using.
    – Mico
    Oct 28 '13 at 5:53
  • 'Corny' is somewhat subjective and not something I normally use to describe the physically appearance of most things. Can you be a little more specific? If you use fontspec, you can tweak the 'weight' of your fonts pretty easily....
    – jon
    Oct 28 '13 at 5:54
  • You can try by loading packages providing native support for times in math, i.e., newtx font (newtxtext anf newtxmath`).
    – Guido
    Oct 28 '13 at 5:55
  • I gotta go to bed now - this post will be revisited.
    – Dave
    Oct 28 '13 at 5:55
  • Wait - what do you mean, jon, by font spec?
    – Dave
    Oct 28 '13 at 5:55

With \usepackage{newtxtext,newtxmath}

enter image description here

With \usepackage{tgtermes}\usepackage[lite]{mtpro2}

enter image description here

With \usepackage{stix}

enter image description here

With \usepackage{mathptmx}

enter image description here


%%% Uncomment one at a time



\section{Electromagnetic Waves in Vacuum}

\subsection{The Wave Equation for $\vect{E}$ and $\vect{B}$}

In regions of space where there is no charge or current,
Maxwell's equations read
&\text{(i)}\quad & \nabla\cdot\vect{E}&=0,\qquad
&&\text{(ii)}\quad & \nabla\times\vect{E}&=-\frac{\partial\vect{B}}{\partial t},
&\text{(iii)}\quad & \nabla\cdot\vect{B}&=0,\qquad
&&\text{(iv)}\quad & \nabla\times\vect{B}&=\mu_0\epsilon_0\frac{\partial\vect{E}}{\partial t}.
They constitute a set of coupled, first-order, partial differential equations
for $\vect{E}$ and $\vect{B}$. They can be \emph{de}coupled by applying the
curl to (iii)~and~(iv):
\nabla\times(\nabla\times\vect{E}) &=
  \nabla\times\left(-\frac{\partial\vect{B}}{\partial t}\right)
-\frac{\partial}{\partial t}(\nabla\times\vect{B})=
-\mu_0\epsilon_0\frac{\partial^2\vect{E}}{\partial t^2},
\nabla\times(\nabla\times\vect{B}) &=
  \nabla\times\left(\mu_0\epsilon_0\frac{\partial\vect{E}}{\partial t}\right)
\mu_0\epsilon_0\frac{\partial}{\partial t}(\nabla\times\vect{E})=
-\mu_0\epsilon_0\frac{\partial^2\vect{B}}{\partial t^2}.
  • I think that the mtpro2, which is the exact answer, is wrong (I think it's the same as the newtx).
    – Manuel
    Oct 29 '13 at 9:40
  • @Manuel You're right; I must have grabbed the wrong picture. The difference in the rendering of \partial is evident. Fixed.
    – egreg
    Oct 29 '13 at 10:00
  • @Marienplatz Indeed! mtpro2 can be downloaded from pctex.com, while stix must be manually installed from CTAN.
    – egreg
    Oct 29 '13 at 10:27
  • As the nabla is a vector, should it be in bold? Oct 29 '13 at 10:50
  • @Marienplatz The boldness of nabla is a stylistic choice; for me it is not a vector: I'm a mathematician, you know. ;-)
    – egreg
    Oct 29 '13 at 11:37

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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