I am trying to type a matrix, but the parentheses looks bigger. How can I make the parentheses fit?  It looks like the problem is caused by the doublespacing, but I want the double spacing for the text. How can I get around this?  Below is the code:  \documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage[doublespacing]{setspace} \begin{document} \begin{equation} \rho= \begin{pmatrix} \rho_{00} &amp; \rho_{01}\\ \rho_{10} &amp; \rho_{11} \end{pmatrix} \end{equation}  \end{document}   Here is the image:
32353
I am having some difficulty getting this to display properly.      \begin{equation} {\bf H} = -{\bf \mu} \cdot {\bf B} = - \gamma B_o {\bf S}_z = -\frac{\gamma B_o\hbar}{2}  \begin{bmatrix} 1&amp;0\\0&amp;-1 \end{bmatrix}. \end{equation}   Which appears as,    I would like the matrix height to be consistant with the rest of the equation.
23614
This question has bugged me for a while. I want to write a nested function, f(g(x)). If I naively enter it:  \begin{align}     f(g(x))=y \end{align}     The problem is that each and every parenthesis is the same size as all of the others. Shouldn't the outer parentheses be larger? But if I do this:  \begin{align}     f\left(g(x)\right)=y \end{align}     Now it looks even less like the functions are nested. What's the proper way to do this?
75207
Does anyone know how to get line spacing in a paragraph to be greater than one and half spacing and less than double spacing? I tried \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{value} but it did not work.
41203
\documentclass [12pt]{article} \oddsidemargin=0pt \topmargin=0pt \textwidth=6.5in \textheight=8.5in \begin{document} \begin{center} {\large\bf\LaTeX\ Example 6} \end{center} We can typeset array structures \begin{equation} \mathbf{A}\times \mathbf{B}=\left| \begin{array}{ccc} \mathbf{i} &amp; \mathbf{j}  &amp; \mathbf{k} \\      a_1  &amp;      a_2        &amp; a_3 \\       b_1  &amp;      b_2        &amp; b_3  \end{array}  \right| \end{equation} \begin{quote} \begin{verbatim} \begin{equation} \mathbf{A}\times \mathbf{B}=\left| \begin{array}{ccc} \mathbf{i} &amp; \mathbf{j}  &amp; \mathbf{k} \\  a_1  &amp;  a_2   &amp; a_3 \\  b_1  &amp;  b_2   &amp; b_3 \end{array} \right| \end{equation} \end{verbatim} \end{quote} Or \begin{equation} \mathbf{A}=\left( \begin{array}{ccc} a_{11} &amp; a_{12} &amp; \cdots &amp; a_{1n} \\ a_{21} &amp; a_{22} &amp; \cdots &amp;  a_{2n} \\ \vdots &amp; \vdots &amp; \ddots &amp; \vdots \\ a_{n1} &amp; a_{n2} &amp; \cdots &amp; a_{nn} \end{array} \right) \end{equation} \end{document}
23612
While using MathJax to typeset binomial coefficients, I came across this problem of different sized brackets if my lower index contains the '0' character. Is there anyway to make the brackets the same size?
51898
I'm new to latex and all of my matrices seem to be created on new lines, I can't seem to put them side by side.  Here is what I am doing to make a matrix (with the 2d identity matrix as an example):  \[ \left( \begin{array}{cc} 1 &amp; 0 \\ 0 &amp; 1 \end{array} \right) \]   Am I making it wrong?  How can I place a second matrix directly beside this, as you would when doing matrix mathematics?  Thanks
75226
\documentclass[11pt]{article} \usepackage{xfrac, array, tabu, multirow, graphicx, setspace, dcolumn, tikz} \usepackage[fleqn]{mathtools} %the argument for d specifies the maximum number of decimal places \usepackage[ngerman]{babel} \usepackage[applemac]{inputenc} \begin{document} \begin{align} \bar{x}&amp;=7+(2\times9) + (2\times10) + (4\times11) + (6\times12) + (7\times14)\\  &amp;+(2\times15) + (3\times16) + 17 + 18 + 19\\ \bar{x}&amp;=14  \end{align}  \end{document}   I was looking long and hard for an answer, I believe {alignat*} is capable to do what I want, I just can't figure out how. I want the too long equation to align as follows: 1st and 3rd row the = should be aligned. But I also want the 1st and 2nd row to be aligned where the first + comes in.
84104
If one uses \left( and \right) to set functions an extra space is created between the function name and the brackets. How does one correctly set functions?  \documentclass{article}  \begin{document}   Compare $f(x)$ and $f\left(x\right)$. \end{document}   Edit  Because of the duplicate tag that was not removed when I edited my question, I created a new question which has a useful answer here:
41046
This is a follow-up question to , but I am afraid it is of a different nature now. The accepted answer seems to put unwanted spaces after the custom-defined environments. I am not sure how to remove them and what is causing them exactly. Apologies if this question is a bit vague as I absolutely have no idea.  Here is a MWE.  \documentclass[a4paper,leqno]{amsart} \usepackage{amsmath, xparse,xspace} \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}  \makeatletter \newcommand{\eqnum}{\textup{\tagform@{\theequation}}} \makeatother  %%%%% \ExplSyntaxOn  \NewDocumentEnvironment{aligncol}{m+b}{\guissmo_aligncol:nn {#1} {#2}}{} \NewDocumentEnvironment{aligncola}{m+b}{\guissmo_aligncol:nn {#1} {#2}}{a}  \seq_new:N \l__guissmo_aligncol_in_seq \seq_new:N \l__guissmo_aligncol_out_seq \seq_new:N \l__guissmo_aligncol_temp_seq \int_new:N \l__guissmo_aligncol_rows_int  \cs_new_protected:Nn\guissmo_aligncol:nn { %storetherowsinthesequence \seq_set_split:Nnn\l__guissmo_aligncol_in_seq{\\}{#2} \int_compare:nF{\int_mod:nn{\seq_count:N\l__guissmo_aligncol_in_seq}{#1}=0} {%numberofrowsnotamultipleof#1,addemptyentries \prg_replicate:nn{#1-\int_mod:nn{\seq_count:N\l__guissmo_aligncol_in_seq}{#1}} { \seq_put_right:Nn\l__guissmo_aligncol_in_seq{} } } \seq_clear:N\l__guissmo_aligncol_out_seq \int_set:Nn\l__guissmo_aligncol_rows_int {\int_div_truncate:nn{\seq_count:N\l__guissmo_aligncol_in_seq}{#1}} \int_step_inline:nn{\l__guissmo_aligncol_rows_int} {%clearthetemporarysequence \seq_clear:N\l__guissmo_aligncol_temp_seq \int_step_inline:nnn{0}{#1-1} { \seq_put_right:Nx\l__guissmo_aligncol_temp_seq { \seq_item:Nn\l__guissmo_aligncol_in_seq {##1+\l__guissmo_aligncol_rows_int*####1} } } \seq_put_right:Nx\l__guissmo_aligncol_out_seq { \seq_use:Nn\l__guissmo_aligncol_temp_seq{&amp;} } } %now\l__guissmo_aligncol_out_seqcontainsthenewrows \begin{equation}\eqnum \begin{minipage}{0.9\textwidth} \setlength{\abovedisplayskip}{0pt} \setlength{\belowdisplayskip}{0pt} \setlength{\abovedisplayshortskip}{0pt} \setlength{\belowdisplayshortskip}{0pt} \setbox0=\hbox{T}%tallestletterofthefirstlineofotherminipage \vskip-\ht0 \begin{align*} \seq_use:Nn\l__guissmo_aligncol_out_seq{\\} \end{align*} \end{minipage} \end{equation} } \ExplSyntaxOff  \begin{document}  Hello! \begin{aligncol}{1} a &amp;= a \end{aligncol} This has an extra space at the beginning. I don't want it. \\ This does not not. \begin{aligncol}{1} a &amp;= a \end{aligncol}This does NOT have an extra space, but the code is ugly. \\ This one does NOT have extra space too! \begin{aligncola}{1} a &amp;= a \end{aligncola} It seems that the space comes after the environment definition. \\ Is it the indeed case?  \end{document}   Here is a screenshot of the output.
5446
How could I go about setting the 'above' and 'below' vspaces around the equation environment?  If the same could be done for the subequations or gather environments, this would be a bonus.
2773
I have a multi-line equation that I want to have matching sized parentheses. The advice I read online was to use \left( equation \right. \\ left. rest-of-equation \right) . However, this syntax leaves first half of the equation unaware of what is in the second half. For example, if you include a square root term after the break, the second parenthesis will be larger than the opening parenthesis. When you are using the aligned environment to split a long equation this can look somewhat offputting.    Compare the top equation to the bottom one. The parentheses match in size for the bottom equation, but the left hand parentheses for the top one is  noticeably smaller.  Top Code:   \begin{aligned}[t]   \gamma_{\text{u}} + \frac{1}{108}   \left(57\gamma_{\text{er}} \right. &amp;+  38\gamma_{\text{se}}\\ &amp; {}\pm  \left.\sqrt{2601 \gamma_{\text{er}}^2 + 3648  \gamma_{\text{er}}\gamma_{\text{se}} + 1444 \gamma_{\text{se}}^2}  \right)   \end{aligned}   Bottom Code:  \begin{aligned}[t] \gamma_{\text{u}} + \frac{1}{16} \left(9\gamma_{\text{er}}  +  6\gamma_{\text{se}} \pm  \sqrt{49 \gamma_{\text{er}}^2 + 76 \gamma_{\text{er}}\gamma_{\text{se}} + 36 \gamma_{\text{se}}^2} \right) \end{aligned}
47134
This is my minimal example, the problem is the different size of the two x. I would expect the matrix to be shrunken too, but it isn't. Why is this and how is it corrected?  \documentclass[a4paper,12pt]{article} \begin{document} $\frac{\begin{pmatrix}x\end{pmatrix}x}{2}$ \end{document}   edit: I just realized: this is not matrix specific. \underbrace does it too. seems like the information to be smaller doesn't get through these "frames":  \documentclass[a4paper,12pt]{article} \begin{document} $\frac{\begin{pmatrix}x\end{pmatrix}x}{2}e^{\begin{pmatrix}x\end{pmatrix}x}\int_{\begin{pmatrix}x\end{pmatrix}x}$ $\frac{\underbrace{x}x}{2}e^{\underbrace{x}x}\int_{\underbrace{x}x}$ \end{document}
10375
I have a very long equation that must be separated into two lines, and it has several pairs of nesting \left \right delimiters. Unfortunately, it seems that they need to be on the same line in order for them to work.  Also I'm using the align environment because I need the aligning functionality. Is there a way to have the size of delimiters automatically adjusted over multiple lines?
30263
I just read a book "Linear Algebra and Its Applications 4E" by David C. Lay. The book is (should be) LaTeX typeset. The matrix and equations are so nice, please see the following 3 examples:        It's so beautiful, so I want get the same effect inside my paper. Here is my code:   \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{colortbl} \newcommand\y{\cellcolor{clight2}} \definecolor{clight2}{RGB}{212, 237, 244}%  %%% \[A=\left[ \begin{array}{ccccc} \y 0 &amp; -3 &amp; -6 &amp; 4 &amp; 9 \\    -1 &amp; \y -2 &amp; -1 &amp; 3 &amp; 1 \\ -2 &amp; -3 &amp; 0 &amp; \y 3 &amp; -1 \\ 1 &amp; 4 &amp; 5 &amp; -9 &amp; -7      \end{array} \right]\]  \[A=\left[\begin{array}{cccccc} \rowcolor{clight2} 3 &amp; -9 &amp; 12 &amp; -9 &amp; 6 &amp; 15\\ 0 &amp; 2 &amp; -4 &amp; 4 &amp; 2 &amp; -6 \\ 0 &amp; 3 &amp; -6 &amp; 6 &amp; 4 &amp; -5 \end{array} \right]\]   And the result:     But how to add these arrows??
28434
Using pdflatex, the command  $e^{a\overbrace{+b+c}}$   results in a bigger size font of the part +b+c under the brace. If I do:  $e^{a\overbrace{\scriptstyle +b+c}}$   the size of +b+c is fixed but the size of the brace is still wrong: the brace has the same size than before but, since the interior font is now smaller, white spaces appear.  Can we fix this?  NOTE: This question can be considered a duplicated of . However, the solutions in that question do not tackle the brace size problem. I don't have enough repuation to add this as a comment there and I don't think it is a good idea to add an answer that is rather a question.  NOTE2: Using mathtools does not change the problem.
28537
If I type it in between these parentheses -> () the backward slash inside the parentheses is removed.  As you see it is not there.  However if I surround it with spaces ( \ ), then it is rendered correctly.
14566
In TeX and LaTeX, the math binary relations (like =, \parallel, &lt;, \le ...) have a default (rubber-length) spacing to either side, which is too large for my liking. How can reduce it?