What's the most elegant way to obtain Dirac operators? (slash notation)

Question

What's the best way to achieve the Dirac slash notation for Dirac operators (contraction with Gamma matrices)? I would have thought the AMSmath packages would have this built in somewhere.

(The cancel package springs to mind, but surely there is an easier method?)

Answer 1

Does

\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{slashed}
\begin{document}
$\slashed{p}$
\end{document}

give what you want?

Answer 2

In addition to mas's answer, you could define your own using an overlap (in mathmode) of the \not operator:

\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{mathtools}% http://ctan.org/pkg/mathtools
\newcommand{\fsl}[1]{\ensuremath{\mathrlap{\!\not{\phantom{#1}}}#1}}% \fsl{<symbol>}
\begin{document}
\noindent $\not{a}\not{b}=4(a\cdot b)$

\noindent $\fsl{a}\fsl{b}=4(a\cdot b)$
\end{document}

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Of course this works best for single-symbol/letter slashing. I think this is more commonly referred to as Feynman slash notation.

Answer 3

Small tip to enter the Dirac slash:

k\!\!\!/ = \gamma^\mu k_\mu

Answer 4

Quite often using Latex there is not a simple solution, so one gets used to having one's own macro file, to accumulate personal solutions, which I recommend if you keep finding yourself wanting to change things.

For this problem, \newcommand{\fsl}[1]{{\centernot{#1}}} is serving me very well. You must include \usepackage{centernot} after your \documentclass for it to work. Or put it at the top of your macro file, once and for all, (or \RequirePackage{centernot} if you've converted your macro file to a package). Even the slashed package requires a \usepackage{slashed} every time you use it.

I've included some output below. The top row is with my simple solution and the bottom row uses the slashed package. It shows that my simple solution is not perfect, just compare my theta slash with the one below it, but then have a look at the phi slash below mine. It just looks like a messy phi and the i slash below is not so flash either. So there is no perfect solution and at least in mine, all the slashes are uniform, which I prefer.

Notice the difference in spacing as well. I prefer it compact for products, but that's a question of taste I guess.

Please note that I've used double brackets around my definition, so the inner brackets become part of what is produced. I do this with most things that are essentially a single symbol, or unit, so they can be sub- or super-scripted without brackets in my source file.

Answer 5

A solution using \ooalign that yields slightly better spacing than Werner's (especially with the very narrow and the very wide characters) is

\renewcommand{\fsl}[1]{{\ooalign{\(#1\)\cr\hidewidth\(/\)\hidewidth\cr}}}

This still looks rather ugly on some capital letters and the slash on the f is almost invisible, but that is maybe just a weakness of the notation. (One could of course add checks to adjust the spacing depending on the character that is to be slashed.)

For an introduction to \ooalign, see this answer.