How do I fix the parentheses and division bar spacing in this quotient of partial derivatives?












2















With this code:



$frac{left(ffrac{partial left[frac{P}{T}right]}{partialV}right)_T
}{left(ffrac{partial
V}{partial T}right)_V}$


And where:



newcommand{ffrac}[2]{ensuremath{frac{displaystyle #1}{displaystyle#2}}}


I get this:



enter image description here



There are three problems:



1) The parentheses around the outermost numerator don't match the contents.



2) The variables are too close to the division bars.



3) I'd prefer the subscripts be closer to the parentheses.



How do I clean these up, in that order of priority?



I'm using the ffrac code (from Fractions with large elements) to increase the display size; but reverting to the standard frac command doesn't change any of the problems I've described.










share|improve this question





























    2















    With this code:



    $frac{left(ffrac{partial left[frac{P}{T}right]}{partialV}right)_T
    }{left(ffrac{partial
    V}{partial T}right)_V}$


    And where:



    newcommand{ffrac}[2]{ensuremath{frac{displaystyle #1}{displaystyle#2}}}


    I get this:



    enter image description here



    There are three problems:



    1) The parentheses around the outermost numerator don't match the contents.



    2) The variables are too close to the division bars.



    3) I'd prefer the subscripts be closer to the parentheses.



    How do I clean these up, in that order of priority?



    I'm using the ffrac code (from Fractions with large elements) to increase the display size; but reverting to the standard frac command doesn't change any of the problems I've described.










    share|improve this question



























      2












      2








      2








      With this code:



      $frac{left(ffrac{partial left[frac{P}{T}right]}{partialV}right)_T
      }{left(ffrac{partial
      V}{partial T}right)_V}$


      And where:



      newcommand{ffrac}[2]{ensuremath{frac{displaystyle #1}{displaystyle#2}}}


      I get this:



      enter image description here



      There are three problems:



      1) The parentheses around the outermost numerator don't match the contents.



      2) The variables are too close to the division bars.



      3) I'd prefer the subscripts be closer to the parentheses.



      How do I clean these up, in that order of priority?



      I'm using the ffrac code (from Fractions with large elements) to increase the display size; but reverting to the standard frac command doesn't change any of the problems I've described.










      share|improve this question
















      With this code:



      $frac{left(ffrac{partial left[frac{P}{T}right]}{partialV}right)_T
      }{left(ffrac{partial
      V}{partial T}right)_V}$


      And where:



      newcommand{ffrac}[2]{ensuremath{frac{displaystyle #1}{displaystyle#2}}}


      I get this:



      enter image description here



      There are three problems:



      1) The parentheses around the outermost numerator don't match the contents.



      2) The variables are too close to the division bars.



      3) I'd prefer the subscripts be closer to the parentheses.



      How do I clean these up, in that order of priority?



      I'm using the ffrac code (from Fractions with large elements) to increase the display size; but reverting to the standard frac command doesn't change any of the problems I've described.







      math-operators fractions






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited Jan 18 at 10:55







      theorist

















      asked Jan 18 at 10:36









      theoristtheorist

      1286




      1286






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4














          I suggest using the esdiff package, which simplifies typing of partial derivatives, and replacing the parentheses in the numerator with a pmatrix environment.



          I added a variant to have the column vector in medium size (~80% of displaystyle). The medsize environment is defined in the nccmath package:



           documentclass{article}
          usepackage{amsmath}
          usepackage{esdiff, nccmath}
          usepackage{booktabs}

          begin{document}



          {aboverulesep=-1.5ptbelowrulesep=0.5pt$displaystyle frac{begin{pmatrix}diffp{begin{bmatrix}
          P\cmidrule(lr){1-1} T
          end{bmatrix}}{V}end{pmatrix}_{!!! T}}{ diffp*{V}{T}{V}}
          qquad{cmidrulekern = 0.4em
          frac{begin{pmatrix}diffp{begin{medsize}begin{bmatrix}
          P\cmidrule(lr){1-1}T
          end{bmatrix}end{medsize}}{V}end{pmatrix}_{!!! T}}{ diffp*{V}{T}{V}}} $}%

          end{document}


          enter image description here






          share|improve this answer


























          • Thanks @Bernard. The problem with the matrix form is that it lacks a division bar between the P and the T.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 1:06











          • @theorist. I hadn't noticed this division bar. Please see if my updated answer is what you want (uses booktabs).

            – Bernard
            Jan 19 at 1:30











          • Thanks again @Berard. That does answer my question about how to fix the appearance, so pending the requisite waiting period for other answers I'll accept it. My one concern, however, is usability. I thought if I saw how it was done for this form, I could then easily apply to others, e.g., where I had ratios in both the numerator and denominator of the top term, or where I had, say, partial (1/T) in the denominator of the bottom term. But with this more complicated syntax, it might be too time consuming to typeset lot of different partials. [Continued....]

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 2:40











          • ....Feel free to suggest that I post this as a separate question, but would there be a way to create a command, say diffp2*, that would provide your typesetting, such that if you wanted the bottom term, you'd enter diffp2*{V}{T}{V} (same construction as diffp*), and if you wanted the top term you'd enter diffp2*{P,T}{V}{T} (the {P,T} indicating a vertical fraction enclosed in square brackets)? Or if you wanted 1/T instead of P/T, you enter diffp2*{1,T}{V}{T}. Then, to construct the whole example from my OP, you'd simply enter frac{diffp2*{P,T}{V}{T}}{diffp2*{V}{T}{V}}.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 3:00





















          3














          The best approach uses, I believe, only a single frac expression and inline-fraction notation for both partial derivative terms as well as for the P/T term.



          enter image description here



          documentclass{article}
          begin{document}
          $frac{(partial(P/T)/partial V)^{}_T}{%
          (partial V/partial T)^{}_V}$
          end{document}





          share|improve this answer


























          • Thanks @Mico. I do like the simple syntax, though my students are more used to seeing the formatting I showed in my OP, which may more easily allow one to keep track of all the variables when the expressions become more complicated. But it's nice to have another option. One problem I see is that the variables (other than the subscripts) and partial symbols should be vertically centered relative to the parentheses and solidi, but here they're instead top-justified.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 1:37













          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "85"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f470666%2fhow-do-i-fix-the-parentheses-and-division-bar-spacing-in-this-quotient-of-partia%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes








          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          4














          I suggest using the esdiff package, which simplifies typing of partial derivatives, and replacing the parentheses in the numerator with a pmatrix environment.



          I added a variant to have the column vector in medium size (~80% of displaystyle). The medsize environment is defined in the nccmath package:



           documentclass{article}
          usepackage{amsmath}
          usepackage{esdiff, nccmath}
          usepackage{booktabs}

          begin{document}



          {aboverulesep=-1.5ptbelowrulesep=0.5pt$displaystyle frac{begin{pmatrix}diffp{begin{bmatrix}
          P\cmidrule(lr){1-1} T
          end{bmatrix}}{V}end{pmatrix}_{!!! T}}{ diffp*{V}{T}{V}}
          qquad{cmidrulekern = 0.4em
          frac{begin{pmatrix}diffp{begin{medsize}begin{bmatrix}
          P\cmidrule(lr){1-1}T
          end{bmatrix}end{medsize}}{V}end{pmatrix}_{!!! T}}{ diffp*{V}{T}{V}}} $}%

          end{document}


          enter image description here






          share|improve this answer


























          • Thanks @Bernard. The problem with the matrix form is that it lacks a division bar between the P and the T.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 1:06











          • @theorist. I hadn't noticed this division bar. Please see if my updated answer is what you want (uses booktabs).

            – Bernard
            Jan 19 at 1:30











          • Thanks again @Berard. That does answer my question about how to fix the appearance, so pending the requisite waiting period for other answers I'll accept it. My one concern, however, is usability. I thought if I saw how it was done for this form, I could then easily apply to others, e.g., where I had ratios in both the numerator and denominator of the top term, or where I had, say, partial (1/T) in the denominator of the bottom term. But with this more complicated syntax, it might be too time consuming to typeset lot of different partials. [Continued....]

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 2:40











          • ....Feel free to suggest that I post this as a separate question, but would there be a way to create a command, say diffp2*, that would provide your typesetting, such that if you wanted the bottom term, you'd enter diffp2*{V}{T}{V} (same construction as diffp*), and if you wanted the top term you'd enter diffp2*{P,T}{V}{T} (the {P,T} indicating a vertical fraction enclosed in square brackets)? Or if you wanted 1/T instead of P/T, you enter diffp2*{1,T}{V}{T}. Then, to construct the whole example from my OP, you'd simply enter frac{diffp2*{P,T}{V}{T}}{diffp2*{V}{T}{V}}.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 3:00


















          4














          I suggest using the esdiff package, which simplifies typing of partial derivatives, and replacing the parentheses in the numerator with a pmatrix environment.



          I added a variant to have the column vector in medium size (~80% of displaystyle). The medsize environment is defined in the nccmath package:



           documentclass{article}
          usepackage{amsmath}
          usepackage{esdiff, nccmath}
          usepackage{booktabs}

          begin{document}



          {aboverulesep=-1.5ptbelowrulesep=0.5pt$displaystyle frac{begin{pmatrix}diffp{begin{bmatrix}
          P\cmidrule(lr){1-1} T
          end{bmatrix}}{V}end{pmatrix}_{!!! T}}{ diffp*{V}{T}{V}}
          qquad{cmidrulekern = 0.4em
          frac{begin{pmatrix}diffp{begin{medsize}begin{bmatrix}
          P\cmidrule(lr){1-1}T
          end{bmatrix}end{medsize}}{V}end{pmatrix}_{!!! T}}{ diffp*{V}{T}{V}}} $}%

          end{document}


          enter image description here






          share|improve this answer


























          • Thanks @Bernard. The problem with the matrix form is that it lacks a division bar between the P and the T.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 1:06











          • @theorist. I hadn't noticed this division bar. Please see if my updated answer is what you want (uses booktabs).

            – Bernard
            Jan 19 at 1:30











          • Thanks again @Berard. That does answer my question about how to fix the appearance, so pending the requisite waiting period for other answers I'll accept it. My one concern, however, is usability. I thought if I saw how it was done for this form, I could then easily apply to others, e.g., where I had ratios in both the numerator and denominator of the top term, or where I had, say, partial (1/T) in the denominator of the bottom term. But with this more complicated syntax, it might be too time consuming to typeset lot of different partials. [Continued....]

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 2:40











          • ....Feel free to suggest that I post this as a separate question, but would there be a way to create a command, say diffp2*, that would provide your typesetting, such that if you wanted the bottom term, you'd enter diffp2*{V}{T}{V} (same construction as diffp*), and if you wanted the top term you'd enter diffp2*{P,T}{V}{T} (the {P,T} indicating a vertical fraction enclosed in square brackets)? Or if you wanted 1/T instead of P/T, you enter diffp2*{1,T}{V}{T}. Then, to construct the whole example from my OP, you'd simply enter frac{diffp2*{P,T}{V}{T}}{diffp2*{V}{T}{V}}.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 3:00
















          4












          4








          4







          I suggest using the esdiff package, which simplifies typing of partial derivatives, and replacing the parentheses in the numerator with a pmatrix environment.



          I added a variant to have the column vector in medium size (~80% of displaystyle). The medsize environment is defined in the nccmath package:



           documentclass{article}
          usepackage{amsmath}
          usepackage{esdiff, nccmath}
          usepackage{booktabs}

          begin{document}



          {aboverulesep=-1.5ptbelowrulesep=0.5pt$displaystyle frac{begin{pmatrix}diffp{begin{bmatrix}
          P\cmidrule(lr){1-1} T
          end{bmatrix}}{V}end{pmatrix}_{!!! T}}{ diffp*{V}{T}{V}}
          qquad{cmidrulekern = 0.4em
          frac{begin{pmatrix}diffp{begin{medsize}begin{bmatrix}
          P\cmidrule(lr){1-1}T
          end{bmatrix}end{medsize}}{V}end{pmatrix}_{!!! T}}{ diffp*{V}{T}{V}}} $}%

          end{document}


          enter image description here






          share|improve this answer















          I suggest using the esdiff package, which simplifies typing of partial derivatives, and replacing the parentheses in the numerator with a pmatrix environment.



          I added a variant to have the column vector in medium size (~80% of displaystyle). The medsize environment is defined in the nccmath package:



           documentclass{article}
          usepackage{amsmath}
          usepackage{esdiff, nccmath}
          usepackage{booktabs}

          begin{document}



          {aboverulesep=-1.5ptbelowrulesep=0.5pt$displaystyle frac{begin{pmatrix}diffp{begin{bmatrix}
          P\cmidrule(lr){1-1} T
          end{bmatrix}}{V}end{pmatrix}_{!!! T}}{ diffp*{V}{T}{V}}
          qquad{cmidrulekern = 0.4em
          frac{begin{pmatrix}diffp{begin{medsize}begin{bmatrix}
          P\cmidrule(lr){1-1}T
          end{bmatrix}end{medsize}}{V}end{pmatrix}_{!!! T}}{ diffp*{V}{T}{V}}} $}%

          end{document}


          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Jan 19 at 1:28

























          answered Jan 18 at 11:23









          BernardBernard

          171k775203




          171k775203













          • Thanks @Bernard. The problem with the matrix form is that it lacks a division bar between the P and the T.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 1:06











          • @theorist. I hadn't noticed this division bar. Please see if my updated answer is what you want (uses booktabs).

            – Bernard
            Jan 19 at 1:30











          • Thanks again @Berard. That does answer my question about how to fix the appearance, so pending the requisite waiting period for other answers I'll accept it. My one concern, however, is usability. I thought if I saw how it was done for this form, I could then easily apply to others, e.g., where I had ratios in both the numerator and denominator of the top term, or where I had, say, partial (1/T) in the denominator of the bottom term. But with this more complicated syntax, it might be too time consuming to typeset lot of different partials. [Continued....]

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 2:40











          • ....Feel free to suggest that I post this as a separate question, but would there be a way to create a command, say diffp2*, that would provide your typesetting, such that if you wanted the bottom term, you'd enter diffp2*{V}{T}{V} (same construction as diffp*), and if you wanted the top term you'd enter diffp2*{P,T}{V}{T} (the {P,T} indicating a vertical fraction enclosed in square brackets)? Or if you wanted 1/T instead of P/T, you enter diffp2*{1,T}{V}{T}. Then, to construct the whole example from my OP, you'd simply enter frac{diffp2*{P,T}{V}{T}}{diffp2*{V}{T}{V}}.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 3:00





















          • Thanks @Bernard. The problem with the matrix form is that it lacks a division bar between the P and the T.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 1:06











          • @theorist. I hadn't noticed this division bar. Please see if my updated answer is what you want (uses booktabs).

            – Bernard
            Jan 19 at 1:30











          • Thanks again @Berard. That does answer my question about how to fix the appearance, so pending the requisite waiting period for other answers I'll accept it. My one concern, however, is usability. I thought if I saw how it was done for this form, I could then easily apply to others, e.g., where I had ratios in both the numerator and denominator of the top term, or where I had, say, partial (1/T) in the denominator of the bottom term. But with this more complicated syntax, it might be too time consuming to typeset lot of different partials. [Continued....]

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 2:40











          • ....Feel free to suggest that I post this as a separate question, but would there be a way to create a command, say diffp2*, that would provide your typesetting, such that if you wanted the bottom term, you'd enter diffp2*{V}{T}{V} (same construction as diffp*), and if you wanted the top term you'd enter diffp2*{P,T}{V}{T} (the {P,T} indicating a vertical fraction enclosed in square brackets)? Or if you wanted 1/T instead of P/T, you enter diffp2*{1,T}{V}{T}. Then, to construct the whole example from my OP, you'd simply enter frac{diffp2*{P,T}{V}{T}}{diffp2*{V}{T}{V}}.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 3:00



















          Thanks @Bernard. The problem with the matrix form is that it lacks a division bar between the P and the T.

          – theorist
          Jan 19 at 1:06





          Thanks @Bernard. The problem with the matrix form is that it lacks a division bar between the P and the T.

          – theorist
          Jan 19 at 1:06













          @theorist. I hadn't noticed this division bar. Please see if my updated answer is what you want (uses booktabs).

          – Bernard
          Jan 19 at 1:30





          @theorist. I hadn't noticed this division bar. Please see if my updated answer is what you want (uses booktabs).

          – Bernard
          Jan 19 at 1:30













          Thanks again @Berard. That does answer my question about how to fix the appearance, so pending the requisite waiting period for other answers I'll accept it. My one concern, however, is usability. I thought if I saw how it was done for this form, I could then easily apply to others, e.g., where I had ratios in both the numerator and denominator of the top term, or where I had, say, partial (1/T) in the denominator of the bottom term. But with this more complicated syntax, it might be too time consuming to typeset lot of different partials. [Continued....]

          – theorist
          Jan 19 at 2:40





          Thanks again @Berard. That does answer my question about how to fix the appearance, so pending the requisite waiting period for other answers I'll accept it. My one concern, however, is usability. I thought if I saw how it was done for this form, I could then easily apply to others, e.g., where I had ratios in both the numerator and denominator of the top term, or where I had, say, partial (1/T) in the denominator of the bottom term. But with this more complicated syntax, it might be too time consuming to typeset lot of different partials. [Continued....]

          – theorist
          Jan 19 at 2:40













          ....Feel free to suggest that I post this as a separate question, but would there be a way to create a command, say diffp2*, that would provide your typesetting, such that if you wanted the bottom term, you'd enter diffp2*{V}{T}{V} (same construction as diffp*), and if you wanted the top term you'd enter diffp2*{P,T}{V}{T} (the {P,T} indicating a vertical fraction enclosed in square brackets)? Or if you wanted 1/T instead of P/T, you enter diffp2*{1,T}{V}{T}. Then, to construct the whole example from my OP, you'd simply enter frac{diffp2*{P,T}{V}{T}}{diffp2*{V}{T}{V}}.

          – theorist
          Jan 19 at 3:00







          ....Feel free to suggest that I post this as a separate question, but would there be a way to create a command, say diffp2*, that would provide your typesetting, such that if you wanted the bottom term, you'd enter diffp2*{V}{T}{V} (same construction as diffp*), and if you wanted the top term you'd enter diffp2*{P,T}{V}{T} (the {P,T} indicating a vertical fraction enclosed in square brackets)? Or if you wanted 1/T instead of P/T, you enter diffp2*{1,T}{V}{T}. Then, to construct the whole example from my OP, you'd simply enter frac{diffp2*{P,T}{V}{T}}{diffp2*{V}{T}{V}}.

          – theorist
          Jan 19 at 3:00













          3














          The best approach uses, I believe, only a single frac expression and inline-fraction notation for both partial derivative terms as well as for the P/T term.



          enter image description here



          documentclass{article}
          begin{document}
          $frac{(partial(P/T)/partial V)^{}_T}{%
          (partial V/partial T)^{}_V}$
          end{document}





          share|improve this answer


























          • Thanks @Mico. I do like the simple syntax, though my students are more used to seeing the formatting I showed in my OP, which may more easily allow one to keep track of all the variables when the expressions become more complicated. But it's nice to have another option. One problem I see is that the variables (other than the subscripts) and partial symbols should be vertically centered relative to the parentheses and solidi, but here they're instead top-justified.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 1:37


















          3














          The best approach uses, I believe, only a single frac expression and inline-fraction notation for both partial derivative terms as well as for the P/T term.



          enter image description here



          documentclass{article}
          begin{document}
          $frac{(partial(P/T)/partial V)^{}_T}{%
          (partial V/partial T)^{}_V}$
          end{document}





          share|improve this answer


























          • Thanks @Mico. I do like the simple syntax, though my students are more used to seeing the formatting I showed in my OP, which may more easily allow one to keep track of all the variables when the expressions become more complicated. But it's nice to have another option. One problem I see is that the variables (other than the subscripts) and partial symbols should be vertically centered relative to the parentheses and solidi, but here they're instead top-justified.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 1:37
















          3












          3








          3







          The best approach uses, I believe, only a single frac expression and inline-fraction notation for both partial derivative terms as well as for the P/T term.



          enter image description here



          documentclass{article}
          begin{document}
          $frac{(partial(P/T)/partial V)^{}_T}{%
          (partial V/partial T)^{}_V}$
          end{document}





          share|improve this answer















          The best approach uses, I believe, only a single frac expression and inline-fraction notation for both partial derivative terms as well as for the P/T term.



          enter image description here



          documentclass{article}
          begin{document}
          $frac{(partial(P/T)/partial V)^{}_T}{%
          (partial V/partial T)^{}_V}$
          end{document}






          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Jan 18 at 15:21

























          answered Jan 18 at 11:19









          MicoMico

          281k31384772




          281k31384772













          • Thanks @Mico. I do like the simple syntax, though my students are more used to seeing the formatting I showed in my OP, which may more easily allow one to keep track of all the variables when the expressions become more complicated. But it's nice to have another option. One problem I see is that the variables (other than the subscripts) and partial symbols should be vertically centered relative to the parentheses and solidi, but here they're instead top-justified.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 1:37





















          • Thanks @Mico. I do like the simple syntax, though my students are more used to seeing the formatting I showed in my OP, which may more easily allow one to keep track of all the variables when the expressions become more complicated. But it's nice to have another option. One problem I see is that the variables (other than the subscripts) and partial symbols should be vertically centered relative to the parentheses and solidi, but here they're instead top-justified.

            – theorist
            Jan 19 at 1:37



















          Thanks @Mico. I do like the simple syntax, though my students are more used to seeing the formatting I showed in my OP, which may more easily allow one to keep track of all the variables when the expressions become more complicated. But it's nice to have another option. One problem I see is that the variables (other than the subscripts) and partial symbols should be vertically centered relative to the parentheses and solidi, but here they're instead top-justified.

          – theorist
          Jan 19 at 1:37







          Thanks @Mico. I do like the simple syntax, though my students are more used to seeing the formatting I showed in my OP, which may more easily allow one to keep track of all the variables when the expressions become more complicated. But it's nice to have another option. One problem I see is that the variables (other than the subscripts) and partial symbols should be vertically centered relative to the parentheses and solidi, but here they're instead top-justified.

          – theorist
          Jan 19 at 1:37




















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f470666%2fhow-do-i-fix-the-parentheses-and-division-bar-spacing-in-this-quotient-of-partia%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Can a sorcerer learn a 5th-level spell early by creating spell slots using the Font of Magic feature?

          Does disintegrating a polymorphed enemy still kill it after the 2018 errata?

          A Topological Invariant for $pi_3(U(n))$