3

I want to balance this fraction \frac{2.5^{13.6}}{100} \sim 2700. Without any modifications, the numerator 2.5 goes too far left and the balance is with the numerator and exponent combined .

enter image description here

I tried approach given here using mathtools, but in this case the exponent goes over the sim sign. How can I achieve a balance between the numerator and denominator, with exponent appearing neatly (not over the \sim)?

MWE attached.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{mathtools}


\begin{document}

\begin{equation*}%
\frac{2.5^{13.6}}{100} \sim 2600
\end{equation*}

\begin{equation*}%
\frac{2.5\mathrlap{^{13.6}}}{100} \sim 2600
\end{equation*}
\end{document}
Improve this question
4
  • 1
    In my opinion: It doesn't seem desirable to make the solidus longer anyway, as it would extend too much to the left. Commented Dec 23, 2023 at 6:40
  • 1
    It's not clear to me what you are trying to accomplish, but what you have posted is perfectly normal (i.e. the first case). If you would like to push it a bit right, you can do $\frac{\ \ \ 2.5^{13.6}}{100} \sim 2600$ and the fraction horizontal bar will be wider. Commented Dec 23, 2023 at 7:18
  • 2
    What the math meaning you are trying to express? In your second fraction above, independently from the operator position, I have doubt if you mean 2.5^13.6/100 or (2.5/100)^13.6.... Commented Dec 23, 2023 at 8:32
  • 1
    The numerator is 2.5^{13.6}, not 2.5 Commented Dec 23, 2023 at 8:48

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
10

First off, the numerator is 2.513.6 and the fact that a part has larger size glyphs is an accident of notation (that has been established for a few centuries). You wouldn't ask if that number got to be denoted as, say, exp(13.6; 2.5).

Typographic balance should always keep into account not hindering readability and keeping the meaning.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{mathtools}

\begin{document}

The standard way to print the statement
\[
\frac{2.5^{13.6}}{100}\sim 2600
\]

The nonstandard way
\[
\settowidth{\dimen0}{$2.5$}
\settowidth{\dimen2}{$100$}
\settowidth{\dimen4}{$^{13.6}$}
\setlength{\dimen0}{\dimeval{\dimen4-(\dimen2-\dimen0)/2}}
\frac{2.5^{\mathrlap{13.6}}}{100}\hspace{\dimen0}\sim 2600
\]

\end{document}

enter image description here

The nonstandard way seems like what you'd like to print, but it's

  1. against established conventions in force since a few centuries;
  2. ambiguous, because the exponent might be thought to refer to the whole fraction 2.5/100.
Improve this answer
2
  • I fully support @egreg. Mathematical notation should aim at unambiguity first, rather than "(subjective) aesthetics". At least when there are two options to choose and the numerator is certainly 2.5^{13.6} and not 2.5. Commented Dec 24, 2023 at 1:58
  • Thanks for the clarifications. Commented Dec 25, 2023 at 4:47

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.