2

I wonder why \mathcal{f} is not working but \mathcall{f} does (the print looks fine), even with the undefinedcontrolsequence error. This happens inside the equation mode and inside the text.`

\begin{equation}
 U_{TT} = A e^{-bR} - \sum_{n=3}^5 \mathcall{f}_{2n} (bR) \frac{C_{2n}}{R^{2n}}
\end{equation}

..in which $\mathcall{f}_{2n}(R)$ are the damping functions from eq. (98).

closed as off-topic by egreg, Steven B. Segletes, Mensch, zeroth, Mico Sep 2 '16 at 14:49

  • This question does not fall within the scope of TeX, LaTeX or related typesetting systems as defined in the help center.
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    Notice the difference in argument delimiter: parens () are not the standard LaTeX delimiter (the case that doesn't work), but braces {} are (the example that works). – Steven B. Segletes Sep 2 '16 at 14:04
  • 2
    The command is \mathcal with a single ell. On the other hand, \mathcal{f} is wrong to begin with, because \mathcal only applies to uppercase letters. – egreg Sep 2 '16 at 14:05
  • 4
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because the issue is due to a typo – egreg Sep 2 '16 at 14:05
  • 1
    I'm not sure what you're expecting. (1) \mathcall is undefined (2) \mathcal (this is the correct name) only makes sense with uppercase letters, such as \mathcal{F} (3) \mathcal(f) tries to apply \mathcal to ( and the result will be unpredictable (4) \mathcal{f} will only print random rubbish (maybe an f) – egreg Sep 2 '16 at 14:10
  • Sorry, yes, in both cases I write {}. The issue is that for the correct command: "\mathcal{f}", the pring goes as: "{", and the undefined control sequence error doesn't appear. Strangely, with "\mathcall{f}", the print is fine.. and the error shows, lots of them by now with the same typing. – Vals Sep 2 '16 at 14:29

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.