2

If I use amssymb, the square at the end of the proof would just be in normal size. But when I use mathabx, the square gets tiny. Is there any way I can use mathabx and still get the normal square?enter image description here

\documentclass[11pt]{article}

\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{mathabx}

\newenvironment{prf}{\underline{\textbf{Proof:}}}{\hfill $\square$}


\begin{document}

\begin{prf}
This is my proof using mathabx.
\end{prf}

\end{document}

Thank you!

4

You can use

\let\oldsquare\square

before loading mathabx and then use \oldsquare in your definition:

\documentclass[11pt]{article}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\let\oldsquare\square
\usepackage{mathabx}

\newenvironment{prf}{\underline{\textbf{Proof:}}}{\hfill$\oldsquare$}

\begin{document}

\begin{prf}
This is my proof using mathabx.
\end{prf}

\end{document}

enter image description here

The proof environment from the amsthm package doesn't use \square, but \openbox as the end-mark, so you can define this command as amsthm.sty does and use it for your definition:

\documentclass[11pt]{article}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{mathabx}

\newcommand{\openbox}{\leavevmode
  \hbox to.77778em{%
  \hfil\vrule
  \vbox to.675em{\hrule width.6em\vfil\hrule}%
  \vrule\hfil}}
\newenvironment{prf}{\underline{\textbf{Proof:}}}{\hfill$\openbox$}

\begin{document}

\begin{prf}
This is my proof using mathabx.
\end{prf}

\end{document}

enter image description here

I'd suggest you, however, to use the amsthm package and its built-in proof environment to typeset your proofs. This will give you, amongst other, proper spacing before and after the proofs, proper placement of the end-mark, no indentation for the first line.

In the follwoing example I used both environments for comparison (I suppressed the underlining, since it is not a typographical good practise, but you can add it back of you really need it):

\documentclass[11pt]{article}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{mathabx}
\usepackage{amsthm}

\newenvironment{prf}{\underline{\textbf{Proof:}}}{\hfill$\openbox$}
\renewcommand\proofname{\normalfont\bfseries Proof:}

\begin{document}

\begin{prf}
This is my proof using mathabx.
\end{prf}

\begin{proof}
This is my proof using mathabx amnd amsthm.
\end{proof}

\end{document}

enter image description here

mathabx also offers \boxvoid, but this produces a square that it's slightly bigger than the regular \openbox command.

Are you sure you want to use mathabx? I ask you because the package redefines many math symbols (as you've already experienced). If you are interestef just in a particular symbol from mathabx, then Importing a Single Symbol From a Different Font shows you how to import the symbol without loading the package.

5
  • Thank you for your answer! I want to use mathabx because I like its not divide symbol. It's just right; not to short or too long. – pineapple Mar 17 '14 at 3:18
  • @pineapple I've edited my answer. Then perhaps you could just import that symbol instead of loading the package and changing many other symbols. – Gonzalo Medina Mar 17 '14 at 3:19
  • @pineapple this question is useful if you decide just to import the symbol: tex.stackexchange.com/q/14386/3954. – Gonzalo Medina Mar 17 '14 at 3:21
  • \openbox is perfect. You're right about importing since I only want one symbol from the entire package. – pineapple Mar 17 '14 at 3:29
  • Wow, oldsquare is great too. – pineapple Mar 17 '14 at 3:31

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.