Re: How to write a "proper" math document

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg120215] Re: How to write a "proper" math document*From*: Richard Fateman <fateman at cs.berkeley.edu>*Date*: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 03:12:17 -0400 (EDT)*References*: <201107041044.GAA02461@smc.vnet.net> <iuukk8$epi$1@smc.vnet.net> <15944200.6757.1309943765495.JavaMail.root@m06> <iv45b8$es8$1@smc.vnet.net> <201107080852.EAA28646@smc.vnet.net> <ivh9dm$llg$1@smc.vnet.net>

On 7/12/2011 3:59 AM, Andrzej Kozlowski wrote: > On 8 Jul 2011, at 10:52, Richard Fateman wrote: > >> I find it far preferable to take stuff out of a computer algebra system >> as TeX and paste it into a static document. This also provides an >> opportunity to fix the broken displays. E.g. we really don't expect a >> display of f=ma to come out f=am. Or E=mc^2 to come out e=c^2m >> (note also that E=2.718... not energy). Mathematica thinks it knows >> better than Einstein and Newton. > > > This argument is entirely bogus. So you don't do what I do. If you really want to produce a "static > document" in Mathematica there is no need to evaluate anything. You > enter f=ma and it stays that way. No, I would take stuff I computed, (which might as, sub-expressions, include forms with particular mnemonic value such as f=ma...) and paste them into a static document. You can also write E=mc^2 or > whatever you like and it will stay this way too. This is so obvious it > is hard to believe anyone could fail to have noticed it. It is hard to believe that anyone could believe that I was interested in pasting a text or non-evaluable expression re-rendered in TeX from Mathematica into a TeX document. Of course the intent would be to take stuff that you have computed in a computer algebra system and paste it in to a static document. E.g. "Here is the result of our algorithm as computed in Mathematica, with terms rearranged slightly for ease of comprehension : .... insert TeX here .... " > > Of course things are different when evaluated output is concerned but it > also obvious that it is much easier to "fix it" in Mathematica than to > copy and paste into TeX and then fix it there. > > There are good reasons for using TeX instead of Mathematica for journal > articles (I almost always do so myself) but very few of them were given > in this thread (and none in the above passage). One of the main reasons > is that in fact it is often very hard and sometimes perhaps impossible > to produce in Mathematica mathematical documents of the kind of > professional quality that is expected by mathematics journals. So you do exactly what I do. Just wanted to argue, I suppose. RJF > > On the other hand I use Mathematica exclusively for such things as > writing homework or exam problems for my students and almost all > "informal" mathematical writing. The advantages of Mathematica for all > such purposes seem to me so obvious that I won't bother listing them > here. > > Andrzej Kozlowski >

**References**:**Re: How to write a "proper" math document***From:*dr DanW <dmaxwarren@gmail.com>

**Re: How to write a "proper" math document***From:*Richard Fateman <fateman@cs.berkeley.edu>

**Re: MultinormalDistribution Question**

**Re: How to write a "proper" math document**

**Re: How to write a "proper" math document**

**Re: How to write a "proper" math document**