Re: Re: Exact Symbolic Notation
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg56354] Re: [mg56291] Re: [mg56269] Exact Symbolic Notation
- From: Chris Chiasson <chris.chiasson at gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 06:23:53 -0400 (EDT)
- References: <200504210936.FAA05018@smc.vnet.net>
- Reply-to: Chris Chiasson <chris.chiasson at gmail.com>
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
Notation[Power[a_,\[Prime]]<==Derivative[1][a_]]
The LHS, if entered from the Notation pallete as it would appear after
making boxes from it, is a good start to making proper looking
derivatives.
On 4/21/05, David Park <djmp at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Alex,
>
> I have to weigh in on this, although I don't know if I'll be much help.
>
> You could try the Notations package that comes with Mathematica. This can be
> used to turn expressions into symbols. I find it rather difficult to use but
> it does work for some people. I think the Notations package (or the
> MakeExpression statement) would be necessary to underline only part of a
> symbol. Maybe someone in the group will show you how to do it.
>
> For subscripted symbols you could try the SubscriptSymbols package by Ted
> Ersek on MathSource. It uses ideas of Carl Woll and also manages the use of
> the Notations package to symbolize subscripted variables if you wish to go
> that far.
>
> In Mathematica p'[x] means the derivative of f with respect to the argument
> and
>
> p' // FullForm
> Derivative[1][p]
>
> I suppose one could get away with using that...
>
> Solve[p'y == 3x, p']
> {{p' -> (3*x)/y}}
>
> but I suspect that difficulties lurk somewhere. I wouldn't use it.
>
> There is a prime character that can be entered as \[Prime], or esc ' esc, so
> you could use
>
> p\[Prime]
>
> but this displays with the prime sitting on the floor instead of being
> raised to it's normal position. I think this is a definite deficiency in
> Mathematica. Primed variables are very common in text books and in the
> mathematical literature. Mathematica has a prime character. Why doesn't WRI
> make it display correctly? I've complained about this a number of times but
> so far you are the only other Mathematica user I've come across who seems to
> want to use primed symbols!
>
> I also think Mathematica would be greatly enhanced if the palette
> characters, the Script, DoubleStruck and Gothic were better formed and
> somewhat larger than their present size. These used to be better in earlier
> versions of Mathematica and somewhere around Version 4 they got worse and
> not as usable. It would also be nice if they had an additional larger bold
> sans serif set of characters that could be used for vectors, matrices etc.
>
> Over the years I've learned that it is almost always possible to manipulate
> expressions to get them into textbook form, but the inadequate extended
> character sets are still a major problem. One that could be easily fixed.
>
> David Park
> djmp at earthlink.net
> http://home.earthlink.net/~djmp/
>
>
> From: Alexandre Costa [mailto:costa at deq.uem.br]
To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
> To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
>
>
> Dear Group,
> It is a pleasure talk to you all again.
> My plain question is:
> I want to use some "exact" notation with Mathematica. For instance,
> I want to use variables like " p' " instead of "pline" (or something like
> that).
> Also I want to use P2 (with the 2 underlined). The last option works in some
> calculations but not in all of them (Why?).
> Finally I want to define f1[x] as a function with the 1 underlined(Why
> is not working?).
>
> Any enlightment on these subject are very welcome.
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
>
--
Chris Chiasson
Kettering University
Mechanical Engineering
Graduate Student
1 810 265 3161
- References:
- Re: Exact Symbolic Notation
- From: "David Park" <djmp@earthlink.net>
- Re: Exact Symbolic Notation