Help with Subscripts in Bland's "Rings and Their Modules

[Math Amateur]

In a recent post on the Linear and Abstract Algebra Forum, I am trying to reproduce the intersection and sum notations in Paul Bland's book, Rings and Their Modules - see the text below:https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/3387
However my use of the Latex code

\bigcap_\Delta N_\alpha

and

\sum_X xRleads to symbols with the subscripts underneath the symbols - as follows:

\(\displaystyle \bigcap_\Delta N_\alpha \)

and

\(\displaystyle \sum_X xR\)
... ... instead of following them in the manner of Bland's text ...Can someone please help me with the Latex code for the symbols as Bland portrays them ...

Peter

 

[mathbalarka]

You can use the \nolimits operator to prevent it from rendering everything as limits of the sum/product :

[NOPARSETEX]$$\sum \nolimits_{\Delta}$$[/NOPARSETEX]

$$\sum \nolimits_{\Delta}$$

 

[Math Amateur]

You can use the \nolimits operator to prevent it from rendering everything as limits of the sum/product :

[NOPARSETEX]$$\sum \nolimits_{\Delta}$$[/NOPARSETEX]

$$\sum \nolimits_{\Delta}$$

Thanks Mathbalarka, appreciate your help ... ...

I have now amended my post in the Linear and Abstract Algebra Forum ...

Thanks again,

Peter

 

[Evgeny.Makarov]

See also https://driven2services.com/staging/mh/index.php?posts/37450/.

 

[Dustinsfl]

In a recent post on the Linear and Abstract Algebra Forum, I am trying to reproduce the intersection and sum notations in Paul Bland's book, Rings and Their Modules - see the text below:https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/3387
However my use of the Latex code

\bigcap_\Delta N_\alpha

and

\sum_X xRleads to symbols with the subscripts underneath the symbols - as follows:

\(\displaystyle \bigcap_\Delta N_\alpha \)

and

\(\displaystyle \sum_X xR\)
... ... instead of following them in the manner of Bland's text ...Can someone please help me with the Latex code for the symbols as Bland portrays them ...

Peter

If you have code in a displaymath environment, you let the limits be below the operator. That is, if you are using

$$ but should be using \[ see link for explanation here
\begin{displaymath}

math mode - Why is \[ ... \] preferable to $$ ... $$? - TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange

If you are writing that exert from the book and you using inline math, why would you do

\(\displaystyle  (1)
\(\sum\limits

then? (1) It makes no sense for inline and if you are using (2), why are you using the line limits?

1. If you are in a display environment, there is no need to fret over vertical space with the equation
2. You shouldn't be using displaystyle in inline math mode.

Additionally, if you read this post's answer, you will see you shouldn't use displaystyle or dfrac in inline math mode as well as limits.

So that begs the question, are you using removing limits from a displaymath stye? If so why? Or are you calling displaystyle or limits in inline math and then calling nolimits? If so, why? I hope you aren't calling limits and nolimits but instead displaystyle nolimits but again why?

 

[Ackbach]

If you are writing that exert from the book and you using inline math, why in the world would you do

\(\displaystyle  (1)
\(\sum\limits

then?

I do that all the time in, say, an enumerate environment. I want some math to be in a line (not displayed on a new line), but it has tall things in it like sums and integrals. So I do

$\displaystyle \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}e^{-x^2} \, dx$,

producing $\displaystyle \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}e^{-x^2} \, dx$
as opposed to

$$ \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}e^{-x^2} \, dx$$

producing
$$ \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}e^{-x^2} \, dx.$$

Now, if you're just writing normal math prose, it might not be such a good idea, because it will stretch baselines between adjacent lines. Example:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. $\displaystyle \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}e^{-x^2} \, dx=\sqrt{\pi}$. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. $$\displaystyle \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}e^{-x^2} \, dx=\sqrt{\pi}.$$ Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

The fully displayed environment allows you to retain normal spacing between adjacent lines, as opposed to the inline version with displaystyle.

 

[Dustinsfl]

I do that all the time in, say, an enumerate environment. I want some math to be in a line (not displayed on a new line), but it has tall things in it like sums and integrals. So I do

Just because you are using displaystyle in inline math doesn't make it a correct procedure. You shouldn't even use limits in inline but that isn't as egregious as displaystyle. Moreover, if the OP was writing that statement from the book and using display math, he shouldn't bother with changing limit locations in the displayed environment. You shouldn't even be changing the limit setup in the inline environment.

 

[Evgeny.Makarov]

Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Nimis diu; non legitur. (Smile)

 

[MarkFL]

Just because you are using displaystyle in inline math doesn't make it a correct procedure. You shouldn't even use limits in inline but that isn't as egregious as displaystyle. Moreover, if the OP was writing that statement from the book and using display math, he shouldn't bother with changing limit locations in the displayed environment. You shouldn't even be changing the limit setup in the inline environment.

I use our MATH tags inline all the time, and they have [m]\displaystyle[/m] intrinsically defined within them.

I think sums/products/limits without limits look bad, and so I do what I feel looks best...We all have differing ideas about what looks good. ;)

Sure, using a displayed environment and then using [m]\nolimits[/m] may in fact be inefficient, but most here are more worried about furthering their understanding of mathematics, not the finer points of using $\LaTeX$. We should be willing to overlook such trivial matters.

 

[Dustinsfl]

I use our MATH tags inline all the time, and they have [m]\displaystyle[/m] intrinsically defined within them.

I think sums/products/limits without limits look bad, and so I do what I feel looks best...We all have differing ideas about what looks good. ;)

Sure, using a displayed environment and then using [m]\nolimits[/m] may in fact be inefficient, but most here are more worried about furthering their understanding of mathematics, not the finer points of using $\LaTeX$. We should be willing to overlook such trivial matters.

That depends. If someone is interested and continualy asking question, they are probably or will be using it in more than a forum capacity. They might as well be shown the correct way to do things.

 

[Ackbach]

Just because you are using displaystyle in inline math doesn't make it a correct procedure.

You're quite right. Otherwise, I'd be committing the ad verecundiam fallacy, or maybe the ad populum fallacy.

For me, there doesn't seem to be too much of an ethical issue about it one way or the other, except insofar as the result is readable, formatted nicely, etc., both for me and for my students (they are usually my target audience). I haven't had students making errors on quizzes because of formatting issues with using displaystyles inline.

Nimis diu; non legitur. (Smile)

At the risk of violating Forum Rule # 12, nolui enim legebantur esse.

 

[Dustinsfl]

You're quite right. Otherwise, I'd be committing the ad verecundiam fallacy, or maybe the ad populum fallacy.

For me, there doesn't seem to be too much of an ethical issue about it one way or the other, except insofar as the result is readable, formatted nicely, etc., both for me and for my students (they are usually my target audience). I haven't had students making errors on quizzes because of formatting issues with using displaystyles inline.
At the risk of violating Forum Rule # 12, nolui enim legebantur esse.

Here is my thought procoess on it. Whenever new standards for coding for fill language comes out, experienced programmers learn it and teach it and correct those still using an outdated standard even though it may work. That is how I see this. If someone asks a questions that shouldn't be done, we should say hey there is no need for that with that environment; moreover, doing x, y, z in this environment is also a no go.

For isntance

$$

will construct displaymath and even though it works, at TeX.SX, we still tell people and give them a link to using

\[

over

$$

and

\(

over

$

.

 

[MarkFL]

That depends. If someone is interested and continualy asking question, they are probably or will be using it in more than a forum capacity. They might as well be shown the correct way to do things.

In this thread, the OP was only looking to fix a post here on the forums. His question was promptly and appropriately answered given his needs. This is what this sub-forum is for, so that people can get relevant help quickly without having to wade through mountains of documentation, from those who can give help promptly and courteously.

 

[MarkFL]

...At the risk of violating Forum Rule # 12, nolui enim legebantur esse.

Consider yourself self-warned...(Smirk)