3

I am introducing this text and equation:

Con la energía del punto cero pasa una cosa muy similar: utilizando la ecuación \ref{E_ZPE}, y sustituyendo las tres frecuencias $\nu _{i}$ experimentales (anarmónicas) obtenemos la energía 
% I have no blank line between the following and the upper text
\begin{equation}
\label{z}
 E_{ZPE}\left ( \text{anarmónica, experimental} \right )=\sum_{i=1}^{3}\left ( \tfrac{1}{2}\,h\nu _{i} \right )=4503.515 \text{ cm$^{-1}$}.
\end{equation}
% I have no blank line between the following and the upper equation
Puesto que las frecuencias calculadas son las armónicas, la $E_{ZPE}$ calculada será también la armónica, la denotaremos como $E_{ZPE}\left ( \text{armónica, calculada} \right )$, y se recoge en la tabla \ref{tabla_resutados_monomero} para cada uno de los cálculos realizados. Como se puede observar, comparanddo la calculada con la $E_{ZPE}\left ( \text{anarmónica, experimental} \right )$, h

This is the result:

enter image description here

The result is that both spacings:

a) the spacing between above_text and equation

b) the spacing between below_text and equation

Both are very big, compared to other equations, such as this one:

Según la ecuación \ref{momento_dipolar_molecula}, para calcular el momento dipolar de la molécula es necesario primero calcular $\rho \left ( \vec{r}\, \right )$, pero obtenerlo a partir de la Ec. (\ref{rho_r}) es enormemente costoso, dada la elevada dimensión de la integral. Se puede demostrar que $\rho \left ( \vec{r}\, \right )$ se puede obtener así:
% I have no blank line between the following and the upper text
\begin{equation}
\label{rho_r_a_partir_de_matriz_P_tu}
\rho \left ( \vec{r}\, \right )=\sum_{t}\sum_{u}P_{tu}\,\phi_{t}^{*}\left (   \vec{r}\, \right )\phi _{u}\left ( \vec{r}\, \right ),
\end{equation}
% I have no blank line between the following and the upper equation
donde $\phi_{t}^{*}\left ( \vec{r}\, \right )$ es, respectivamente, el conjugado complejo del orbital atómico $t$ o $u$ en el punto $\left ( \vec{r}\, \right )$ (orbital atómico, o en general, función de base). $P_{tu}$ son los elementos de la matriz de densidad $P_{tu}$. De esta forma, tras terminar el cálculo $FC=SCE$, podemos reciclar la matriz  

Which this is the result: enter image description here

Why in the first case both spacings are bigger than in the second case ?

  • 4
    ...you do know that the first equation has a superscript (upper range) for the summation, causing the math operator to stick out higher than the other... resulting in the bigger gap. – Werner Jun 24 '14 at 22:54
  • @Werner: So, it is completely normal what is happening... But, would it be a possible way to make smaller this space ? (I need to "compress" information). Thank you very much. – DavidC. Jun 25 '14 at 0:06
  • 1
    And this is mainly a consequence of using widened leading (aka interline space). Another factor can be the necessity for TeX to stretch spaces in order to fill up a page. – egreg Jun 25 '14 at 8:20
  • @egreg: Thanks for the response. What do you mean by "widened leading (aka interline space" ? Where could I find more information about this? Thank you. – DavidC. Jun 28 '14 at 19:01
  • 1
    @DavidC. I'm referring to one half or double spacing. – egreg Jun 28 '14 at 19:53
6

You can remove the height and depth of an object using \smash, and substitute in an alternative height and depth using a \vphantom construction:

enter image description here

\documentclass{article}

\usepackage{lipsum}

\begin{document}

\lipsum[2]
\begin{equation}
  f(x) = \sum_{i=1}^n n \qquad g(x) = \sum_x A(x)
\end{equation}
\lipsum[2]
\begin{equation}
  f(x) = \vphantom{\sum_{i=1}}\smash{\sum_{i=1}^n} n \qquad g(x) = \sum_x A(x)
\end{equation}
\lipsum[2]

\end{document}

This is probably the safest way of doing it since it's localized to the equation in question. Alternatives could include an adjustment to the length \abovedisplayskip and/or \abovedisplayshortskip, but those would be global replacements that may yield undesirable results in general situations.

  • @Werner.Thank you. So, in this example, \vphantom and \smash must be located before and after sub and superscript code for the summation, ok. But could this be applied for a non-superscript kind of equation, such as: E \left ( \text{experimental, monómero} \right )= \text{Energía átomos aislados}+E_{\mathit{ZPE}}+D_{0} Where should the \vphantom and \smash be localizad ? Thanks. – DavidC. Jun 28 '14 at 19:01
  • 1
    @DavidC.: The \smash should be used for whatever you want actually display. The \vphantom can be anywhere on the line since it merely acts as a strut to ensure that the line has the height of the \vphantom content (since \smash removes exactly that height). – Werner Jun 28 '14 at 19:58

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.