Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ ¹ ² ³ °
 

You are not logged in. #76 20100420 15:02:36
Re: LaTeX  A Crash CourseHi Amarylli$; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #77 20101218 12:55:49
Re: LaTeX  A Crash CourseCan I offer a suggestion regarding the typesetting of matrices. The array environment is very useful, however, there is a dedicated environment which some may find useful, simply use: \begin{vmatrix} a & b \\ c & d \end{vmatrix} Produces etc. Last edited by Au101 (20101218 12:58:46) #78 20110106 20:07:00
Re: LaTeX  A Crash CourseHey, I am Moris here, I am student of Comarce. So i am facing the problem in mathematic. Please someone provide some formulas and new Iadias.........Thanking you. #79 20110107 02:52:26
Re: LaTeX  A Crash CourseHi Moris; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #81 20111010 00:57:08
Re: LaTeX  A Crash CourseHi loida; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #82 20111010 00:59:21
Re: LaTeX  A Crash Coursehi loida is that it? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #84 20111010 01:11:47
Re: LaTeX  A Crash CourseHi loida; Is that essentially the same symbol? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #86 20111010 01:17:52
Re: LaTeX  A Crash CourseThat is what I thought. How did you get the answer then? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #88 20111010 01:23:11
Re: LaTeX  A Crash CourseHi; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #91 20111010 02:47:19
Re: LaTeX  A Crash CourseHi, yeah, I won't go into the details, but basically LaTeX is a markup language, and they way markup works  as you will probably have realised  is that if you want your text to appear in a certain way  such as to be in bold face  then you 'mark up' the text. i.e. you use special sequences of characters (called control sequences) to induce an effect (e.g. \textbf{Hi} makes Hi become Hi. textbf is the control sequence and the \ is known as the escape character, which escapes the control sequence. This means that the control sequence is interpreted as a command, rather than just normal text.) Anyway, I probably could have explained that better, but it's not very important, so don't worry if you didn't follow it. The main point is that these control sequences are interpreted by a renderer, which creates the final document. Now, the renderer already 'knows' the basic commands, such as \frac{x}{y}, however, we can also write packages which extend LaTeX beyond these very basic functions. Now, bbold is an example of a package which was written to give LaTeX more functionality. If our renderer doesn't know how to interpret \mathbb{1} in the way we want it to, then we have to load that package, and then the renderer will use the information contained in that package to interpret our control sequence. Otherwise, it will use the standard interpretation. IIn this case, the mathsisfun renderer does know the standard interpretation (bobbym's symbol) but not the interpretation you want. If you ever use your own renderer and write LaTeX for yourself outside of this forum, then you can use the bbold package and extend your own LaTeX capabilities. However, the mathsisfun forum (for very good reasons, mostly simplicity but also to prevent abuse) does not support the loading of extra packages, so we have to make do with the functionality we have. Last edited by Au101 (20111010 02:56:28) #93 20111010 18:02:20
Re: LaTeX  A Crash CourseHi Last edited by Au101 (20111010 18:02:41) #95 20111010 21:15:49
Re: LaTeX  A Crash CourseHi Ioida #98 20111031 04:20:43
Re: LaTeX  A Crash CourseHi sassygirl; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #100 20111209 08:44:48
Re: LaTeX  A Crash CourseHi; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. 