Succumbing to LaTeX

200 Comments / Blog

Update: The original post below was written as part of Cosmic Variance. Every time you move your blog, stuff like this changes. Here, the way to put something into Latex is to start your comment with the tag 

{latexpage}

Except — important! — use square brackets [] rather than curly braces {}. Then anything you put inside dollar signs gets interpreted as a LaTeX math formula, as usual. So

$g_{\mu\nu}$

should show up as

g_{\mu\nu}.

I’m using the QuickLaTeX plugin; more details here.

This stands in marked contrast with the previous system, explained below.

——————————————————-

For a long time I was reluctant to joint the many other sciencey blogs that had integrated equations by providing support for LaTeX, the technical typesetting system that nearly every physicist and mathematician uses. Possible reasons for this attitude include:

  1. We felt it was important to remain accessible to a wide range of readership, and feared that the appearance of equations would put people off (and tempt us into being unnecessarily technical).
  2. It sounded like work.

You can decide for yourself which is more true. The good thing is, there is no wrong answer!

But right now I am uninspired to blog because my brain is preoccupied with real science stuff. So I thought of posting about some of the fun ideas in quantum mechanics I’ve been learning about. But there’s really no way to do it without equations. So for that reason, and in belated honor of Donald Knuth’s birthday, I went and installed the LatexRenderer plugin.

So now it’s easy to include equations; they should even be available in comments. All you have to do is type [ latex ], then your LaTeX commands, then [ /latex ], except no spaces. So for example

[ latex ]R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}Rg_{\mu\nu}=8\pi G T_{\mu\nu}[ /latex ],

if you left out the spaces, should produce

R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}Rg_{\mu\nu}=8\pi G T_{\mu\nu}.

There are a million online tutorials; try this list of commands to get you started. Use comments to this post to try it out. (Sadly, no preview, so be careful, and this post will remain open for playing around.) One thing I’ve noticed: don’t use linebreaks within the formulas, just put everything on the same line. And use “displaystyle” if you want the look of a set-off (rather than in-line) equation.

Related Posts:

200 Comments

200 thoughts on “Succumbing to LaTeX”

  5. Sean

    Sorry, I think that was my fault — tried to mess with a preview plugin, and mistakenly deactivated the latex plugin. Should be okay now.

  6. chemicalscum

    I see no equations using IE 7.0. There is a javascript error: Line 56, ‘document.getElementById(..) is null or not an object’

    I see no equations either on both FF 2.0.0.11 and IE6 on Windows. Haven’t yet tried it on a Linux box.

  9. chemicalscum

    OK lets give it a try see if I can get some Dirac Notation:

    $latex % define new matrix element, ME command
    newcommand{ME}[3]{ensuremath{left langle left. #1
    right. right| #2 left| left. #3 right. right rangle}}

    ME{a}{M}{b}$

  13. MedallionOfFerret

    Emulation is the sincerest form of flattery:

    $latex displaystyle langlelangle hat{mathcal O}ranglerangle =lim_{t rightarrow infty}frac{1}{t}int^t_0 langle psi_s|hat{mathcal O}|psi_srangle ds = rm{tr}(hatrho hat{mathcal O}),,$

    $latex displaystyle hatrho = frac{1}{Z} exp{left(-beta hat{H} – sum^n_{i=2} mu_i hat{F}_iright)},.$

  18. andy

    Hmmm… doesn’t like square brackets…

    $latex [ dfrac{abc}{def} ] $
    $latex left [ dfrac{abc}{def} right ] $

Comments are closed.

Scroll to Top