PSA: This site supports MathJax
Maybe everyone else knew this, but I couldn't figure out the delimiter. It's
[math]\forall x \Box Fx \to \Box \forall x Fx[/math]
Those appear to be inline delimiters.
For comparison, just using Unicode looks like this:
?x?Fx???xFx
Maybe someone with more expertise than I (@andrewk?) could post (and sticky?) a short [math]\LaTeX[/math] primer somewhere.
[math][/math][math]\forall x \Box Fx \to \Box \forall x Fx[/math]
Those appear to be inline delimiters.
For comparison, just using Unicode looks like this:
?x?Fx???xFx
Maybe someone with more expertise than I (@andrewk?) could post (and sticky?) a short [math]\LaTeX[/math] primer somewhere.
Comments (4)
Show Math As > (choose between mathml and Latex commands); and
MathJax Help.
Right-Clicking on the first piece of code above (which is MathJax Latex) gives that, whereas doing it on the second, which is Unicode, does not.
There is a good [math]\LaTeX[/math] primer on physicsforums here.
MathJax is a Java implementation of LaTeX that interacts with the web browser.Stand-alone LaTeX uses $ and the double-dollar-sign as delimiters for in-line and separate line ('display style') formulas. MathJax implementations usually don't recognise those because that would prevent people from using the $ sign outside of equations.
physicsforums uses ## as delimiter for in-line but keeps the double dollar sign for display style since one doesn't normally type a double dollar sign in ordinary text.
As Srap discovered above, the in-line delimiters for this forum are [ math] and [ /math] but without the spaces inside the square brackets (which I inserted here to stop MathJax from interpreting them as delimiters - a classic 'use' vs 'reference' distinction that language philosophers will enjoy).
I don't know what the delimiters are for display math. I tried a few of the usual things like \[, $$ and [tex] but they didn't work. The forum maintainers would know.
• LATEX Tutorials A PRIMER (2003)
• Getting Started with LaTeX (1995) » Mathematical Symbols
Note, the forums do not support MathJax completely; there are some limitations here and there (e.g. multiple lines of LATEX).
The Basel problem:
[math]
\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{n^2} = \frac{\pi^2}{6}
[/math]
Function continuity:
[math]f[/math] is continuous at [math]d[/math]
[math]
\forall \epsilon \in \mathbb{R}_{+} \Bigl[ \exists \delta \in \mathbb{R}_{+} \bigl[ \left| x - d \right| < \delta \Rightarrow \left| f(x) - f(d) \right| < \epsilon \bigr] \Bigr]
[/math]
... and God said ...
[math]
\begin{aligned} \nabla \times \vec{\mathbf{B}} -\, \frac1c\, \frac{\partial\vec{\mathbf{E}}}{\partial t} & = \frac{4\pi}{c}\vec{\mathbf{j}} \\ \nabla \cdot \vec{\mathbf{E}} & = 4 \pi \rho \\ \nabla \times \vec{\mathbf{E}}\, +\, \frac1c\, \frac{\partial\vec{\mathbf{B}}}{\partial t} & = \vec{\mathbf{0}} \\ \nabla \cdot \vec{\mathbf{B}} & = 0 \end{aligned}
[/math]
... and there was light.
Despite some limitations, should be good enough for our proposes.
and then using the standard latex delimiters for display style inside there, eg
[math]\begin{align}\sum_{i=1}^n r^2 = r\ \frac{1-r^{n}}{1-r}\end{align}[/math]
which used the code
We can tell that it's display style because the subscripts and superscripts for the sum are directly above and below the [math]\Sigma[/math], instead of to the right of it.
One thing about MathJax though is that its functioning varies between browsers. My post above looked fine to me when I did it at home this morning on Firefox on Linux, but now, at work on IE in Windows, it interpreted some of the double-dollars as delimiters and made a whole bunch of ordinary text into unreadable pseudo-math. I have fixed that up now so it looks proper on IE-Windows, but I wonder what it will look like from my home computer.