#latex

69 posts · Last used 4d

Boosted by @fedicat@pc.cafe
Mathstodon.xyz is a Mastodon server for people who love maths. We have LaTeX rendering in the web interface! We hope there’ll be lots of maths chat, but any topic following the code of conduct is OK. This server has a post size of up to 1729 characters. :Fediverse: https://mathstodon.xyz You can find out more at https://mathstodon.xyz/about or contact the admin account @christianp@mathstodon.xyz#FeaturedServer #Mathematics #Maths #Math #LaTeX #Mastodon #Fediverse #FreeFediverse
3
0
5
0
Ich übe zur Zeit Buchsatz in #TexLatex mit Overleaf. Macht schon Spaß. Nachteil ist nur, dass es aus dem Quelltext (mein Manuskript) die Einzüge bei Dialogen nicht übernehmen kann, das wird viel Arbeit, falls ich doch ins SP gehe. Das ist dann wohl der Vorteil von Programmen wie Scribus, aber bei denen brauch ich so lange bis ich da durchsteige. 😬 #schreiben #autorinnen_leben #Buch #Buchsatz #latex
2
2
1
0
🛠 What does an end-to-end open-source stack look like for an independent hydrogeochemical monograph? Doing full-cycle research—from thermodynamic calculations to print-ready LaTeX typesetting—requires a synchronized toolkit. Here is the exact stack: 🧪 Thermodynamics & Analytics: • #PHREEQC 3.7.3 for aqueous speciation&equilibrium modeling. • #Rstats Stack: RedModRphree, ggtern, sf/terra, tidyverse (ETL). 🗺 GIS & Literature Search: • #QGIS for spatial alignment & cartography. • #Recoll for local full-text search across reference databases. 📚 Typesetting & Reproducibility: • #LaTeX2e + #TeXStudio + #JabRef for typography & #BibTeX references. • xtable for automated R-to-LaTeX data exporting. • #Debian Linux as a main engine. 💡 Takeaway: Zero proprietary software licenses needed. Complete reproducibility from raw analytical data to a print-ready PDF. 🔗 The published version of monoghraph is here: https://zenodo.org/records/20709306 #Hydrogeology #Geochemistry #LaTeX #GIS #OpenScience #DataScience #SvystunovaGully
6
4
5
0
Replying to
@SmartmanApps@dotnet.social surely you understand that the interpretation of a given string of symbols depends entirely on your definitions, and surely you can admit that while we are close, we don't have a global standard for these definitions. Even if there was one global standard for order of operations and definitions, people would still be confused about 1÷ab, as you rightly pointed out with your example. And yes, they would be wrong in such a case, but that doesn't magically make the source of confusion go away. The reason I say that fractions make things clearer is because their scope is entirely unambiguous. To write a fraction you are forced to indicate its scope in its entirety, whereas with ‘÷’ we need to indicate its scope by relying on brackets. It's true that fractions are difficult to write in many contexts — though they *can* be written on a single line without brackets, if we use #LaTeX for example, or if it's manuscript. I don't think it's a coincidence that in the majority of maths papers where division is a relevant operation, we tend to see fractions and not division operators. If we really did want to use the division operator — for whatever reason — I would suggest that we use the form ‘((φ)÷(ψ))’, where the brackets leave no room for confusion (however misplaced the confusion may be). This could be excepted in the case where φ or ψ are atomic expressions, since then there is only one way to interpret the order.
0
5
0
0