3 ms·

Most of the things that need to be written in LaTeX (math) cannot be written in any other language yet.

nabla9 3y ago
There are lots of applications that can be used to write math that is converted into LaTeX equations. You can also use MathML -> Latex The equation subset is the best part of LaTeX syntax and so many people learn it. It's very compact compared to alternatives.
- cbolton 3y ago
  I find the typst syntax nicer and more compact: https://typst.app/docs/guides/guide-for-latex-users/#maths https://typst.app/docs/guides/guide-for-latex-users/#maths I was initially suprised to see that the typst devs chose to go with their own syntax, but I'm now very happy they did.
  - trueismywork 3y ago
    I would be interested to see how the formula looks for a more complicated equation. For example, Eq 3.12 or 3.31 in the link https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.09346.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.09346.pdf
    - ioasuncvinvaer 3y ago
      should be close to 3.12 $ norm((u_0)_j-hat(u)_j (t=0))_(L^2 TT^d) &<= norm(u_j - hat(u)_j)_(L^2 delta Omega) \ &<= sqrt(2 max {2h_Omega,d+1} / rho_Omega) norm(u_j - hat(u)_j)_(H^1 (Omega)) \ &<= sqrt(2 max {2h_Omega,d+1} / rho_Omega) C_(1,k,d+1,u_1) lambda_1 (N) N^(-k+1) $
      - trueismywork 3y ago
        Thanks for your effort. This was instructive. Seems there's a decent alternative to LaTeX. May be over time it becomes as powerful in all respects.
    - cbolton 3y ago
      here's 3.31: $ cal(C)(M) = cal(E)_T^t (theta, cal(S)_t)^2 + C_t M_t^(-2/d) + cal(E)_T^"PDE" (theta_t, cal(S)_"int")^2 + C_"PDE" M_"int"^(-2/(d+1)) \ + C_1T^(1/2) [cal(E)_T^"div" (theta, cal(S)_"int") + C_"div" M_"int"^(-1/(d+1)) + (1+nu)(cal(E)_T^s (theta, cal(S)_s) + C_s M_s^(-1/d))] $ Would you have the equivalent LaTeX code for comparison?
      - trueismywork 3y ago
        It should be in the LaTeX sources on the website. This does look much more compact though. Just to now push it a little. I wonder if I can make the `1/(d+1)` in the superscript be not a real fraction but inline fraction.
        cbolton 3y ago
        You can do that by escaping the slash: `1\/(d+1)`
        trueismywork 3y ago
        Cool
        cbolton 3y ago
        Here are the LaTeX versions from the article source: \begin{align} \begin{split} \mathcal{C}(M) = &\: \Et^t(\theta,\S_t)^2 + C_t M_t^{-\frac{2}{d}} + \Et^\pde(\theta,\S_\inte)^2 +C_\pde M_\mathrm{int}^{-\frac{2}{d+1}}\\&+ C_1{T}^{\frac{1}{2}} \bigg[\Et^\divv(\theta,\S_\inte) +C_\divv M_\mathrm{int}^{-\frac{1}{d+1}}+(1+\nu) big( \Et^s(\theta,\S_s) + C_s M_s^{-\frac{1}{d}}\big)\bigg],\\ \end{split} \end{align} and for 3.12: \begin{align} \begin{split} \norm{(u_0)_j-\hu_j(t=0)}_{L^2(\mathbb{T}^d)} &\leq \norm{u_j-\hu_j}_{L^2(\partial \Omega)} \\&\leq \sqrt{\frac{2\max\left\{2h_\Omega,d+1\right\}} {\rho_\Omega}}\norm{u_j-\hu_j}_{H^1(\Omega)}\\ &\leq \sqrt{\frac{2\max\left\{2h_\Omega,d+1\right\}} {\rho_\Omega}}C_{1,k,d+1, u_1} \lambda_{1}(N)N^{-k+1}, \end{split} \end{align} Note that these rely on user-defined commands \Et, \pde, \inte, \divv, \S, \hu, for example \renewcommand{\S}{\mathcal{S}} and \newcommand{\Et}{\mathcal{E}_T}.

There are lots of applications that can be used to write math that is converted into LaTeX equations. You can also use MathML -> Latex The equation subset is the best part of LaTeX syntax and so many people learn it. It's very compact compared to alternatives.

cbolton 3y ago
I find the typst syntax nicer and more compact: https://typst.app/docs/guides/guide-for-latex-users/#maths https://typst.app/docs/guides/guide-for-latex-users/#maths I was initially suprised to see that the typst devs chose to go with their own syntax, but I'm now very happy they did.
- trueismywork 3y ago
  I would be interested to see how the formula looks for a more complicated equation. For example, Eq 3.12 or 3.31 in the link https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.09346.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.09346.pdf
  - ioasuncvinvaer 3y ago
    should be close to 3.12 $ norm((u_0)_j-hat(u)_j (t=0))_(L^2 TT^d) &<= norm(u_j - hat(u)_j)_(L^2 delta Omega) \ &<= sqrt(2 max {2h_Omega,d+1} / rho_Omega) norm(u_j - hat(u)_j)_(H^1 (Omega)) \ &<= sqrt(2 max {2h_Omega,d+1} / rho_Omega) C_(1,k,d+1,u_1) lambda_1 (N) N^(-k+1) $
    - trueismywork 3y ago
      Thanks for your effort. This was instructive. Seems there's a decent alternative to LaTeX. May be over time it becomes as powerful in all respects.
  - cbolton 3y ago
    here's 3.31: $ cal(C)(M) = cal(E)_T^t (theta, cal(S)_t)^2 + C_t M_t^(-2/d) + cal(E)_T^"PDE" (theta_t, cal(S)_"int")^2 + C_"PDE" M_"int"^(-2/(d+1)) \ + C_1T^(1/2) [cal(E)_T^"div" (theta, cal(S)_"int") + C_"div" M_"int"^(-1/(d+1)) + (1+nu)(cal(E)_T^s (theta, cal(S)_s) + C_s M_s^(-1/d))] $ Would you have the equivalent LaTeX code for comparison?
    - trueismywork 3y ago
      It should be in the LaTeX sources on the website. This does look much more compact though. Just to now push it a little. I wonder if I can make the `1/(d+1)` in the superscript be not a real fraction but inline fraction.
      - cbolton 3y ago
        You can do that by escaping the slash: `1\/(d+1)`
        trueismywork 3y ago
        Cool
      - cbolton 3y ago
        Here are the LaTeX versions from the article source: \begin{align} \begin{split} \mathcal{C}(M) = &\: \Et^t(\theta,\S_t)^2 + C_t M_t^{-\frac{2}{d}} + \Et^\pde(\theta,\S_\inte)^2 +C_\pde M_\mathrm{int}^{-\frac{2}{d+1}}\\&+ C_1{T}^{\frac{1}{2}} \bigg[\Et^\divv(\theta,\S_\inte) +C_\divv M_\mathrm{int}^{-\frac{1}{d+1}}+(1+\nu) big( \Et^s(\theta,\S_s) + C_s M_s^{-\frac{1}{d}}\big)\bigg],\\ \end{split} \end{align} and for 3.12: \begin{align} \begin{split} \norm{(u_0)_j-\hu_j(t=0)}_{L^2(\mathbb{T}^d)} &\leq \norm{u_j-\hu_j}_{L^2(\partial \Omega)} \\&\leq \sqrt{\frac{2\max\left\{2h_\Omega,d+1\right\}} {\rho_\Omega}}\norm{u_j-\hu_j}_{H^1(\Omega)}\\ &\leq \sqrt{\frac{2\max\left\{2h_\Omega,d+1\right\}} {\rho_\Omega}}C_{1,k,d+1, u_1} \lambda_{1}(N)N^{-k+1}, \end{split} \end{align} Note that these rely on user-defined commands \Et, \pde, \inte, \divv, \S, \hu, for example \renewcommand{\S}{\mathcal{S}} and \newcommand{\Et}{\mathcal{E}_T}.