Re: Suggestions on how to use standard engineering symbols in Mathematica which conflict with Mathematica own symbols?
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg104101] Re: Suggestions on how to use standard engineering symbols in Mathematica which conflict with Mathematica own symbols?
- From: "David Park" <djmpark at comcast.net>
- Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:12:15 -0400 (EDT)
- References: <6278953.1255860068980.JavaMail.root@n11>
You could use a MakeBoxes definition.
MakeBoxes[mI, form : (StandardForm | TraditionalForm)] :=
InterpretationBox[#1, #2] & @@ {"I", mI}
Then you can enter the moment of inertia as mI but it will display as I in
the output and conform with the textbooks. The output also can be copied and
pasted.
(r + 3) mI
I (3 + r)
The only possible problem is that you now have some ambiguity in the meaning
of I in output expressions. But since E and I get their own special output
display maybe it is not too bad.
David Park
djmpark at comcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~djmpark/
From: Nasser M. Abbasi [mailto:nma at 12000.org]
Hello
This is a problem I am sure all of us had.
It would be nice to use the same standard engineering/physics
symbols/letters found in textbook to write the equations in mathematica.
But some/many of those symbols conflict with existing Mathemtica symbols.
For example, Young modulus is always written as E, but E in mathematica is
reserved to the exponential constant, and I would like to use I (upper case
I) to mean the moment of inertia, and not have it conflict with complex
number I. And many other examples.
I was wondering if there is a way to still use these letters in my equations
but not conflict with Mathematica's?
I thought may be I could make a bold versions of these letters with a new
code, or find latine characters which "looks like" these from the palette,
but have different ASCII code.
Or may be I could tell mathematica somehow to "undefine" these symbols
during some computation and restore them again, so it will not interpret
them as its own standard symbols only during this computation, but was not
sure if this is a good idea? (would this will cause a problem internally to
Mathematica as it could very well use these symbols in its own package code.
I could always use Exp[] instead of E and use Sqrt[-1] instead of "I" when I
really mean to use the Mathematica letters and leave E and I etc... for my
use.
Any other ideas others have on this subject? I'd really like to write the
equations as they appear in the textbook if possible and not have to rename
standard engineering letters to something else.
--Nasser