Reverse an existing big math operator keeping same functionality (such as limits)
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I would like to define an operator
rsum
which has all the same functionality ofsum
with the only difference being thatrsum
displays a mirrored image of the sigma glyph.
I have found the following questions which each address a part of what I want:
How are big operators defined?
Reversed letters in a mathematical formula
However, I'm having difficulty in marrying the two accepted answers into a single solution. How would I go about accomplishing this? (An answer to this question doesn't necessarily have to use the approaches in the other questions.)
I don't anticipate using custom fonts for this purpose, but the capability to do so wouldn't be unappreciated (if not by me by someone in the future, I'm sure).
math-mode graphics amsmath math-operators
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I would like to define an operator
rsum
which has all the same functionality ofsum
with the only difference being thatrsum
displays a mirrored image of the sigma glyph.
I have found the following questions which each address a part of what I want:
How are big operators defined?
Reversed letters in a mathematical formula
However, I'm having difficulty in marrying the two accepted answers into a single solution. How would I go about accomplishing this? (An answer to this question doesn't necessarily have to use the approaches in the other questions.)
I don't anticipate using custom fonts for this purpose, but the capability to do so wouldn't be unappreciated (if not by me by someone in the future, I'm sure).
math-mode graphics amsmath math-operators
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I would like to define an operator
rsum
which has all the same functionality ofsum
with the only difference being thatrsum
displays a mirrored image of the sigma glyph.
I have found the following questions which each address a part of what I want:
How are big operators defined?
Reversed letters in a mathematical formula
However, I'm having difficulty in marrying the two accepted answers into a single solution. How would I go about accomplishing this? (An answer to this question doesn't necessarily have to use the approaches in the other questions.)
I don't anticipate using custom fonts for this purpose, but the capability to do so wouldn't be unappreciated (if not by me by someone in the future, I'm sure).
math-mode graphics amsmath math-operators
I would like to define an operator
rsum
which has all the same functionality ofsum
with the only difference being thatrsum
displays a mirrored image of the sigma glyph.
I have found the following questions which each address a part of what I want:
How are big operators defined?
Reversed letters in a mathematical formula
However, I'm having difficulty in marrying the two accepted answers into a single solution. How would I go about accomplishing this? (An answer to this question doesn't necessarily have to use the approaches in the other questions.)
I don't anticipate using custom fonts for this purpose, but the capability to do so wouldn't be unappreciated (if not by me by someone in the future, I'm sure).
math-mode graphics amsmath math-operators
math-mode graphics amsmath math-operators
asked 4 hours ago
Robert Wolfe
1205
1205
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Well, it's almost automatic. ;-)
documentclassarticle
usepackageamsmath
usepackagegraphicx
makeatletter
newcommandrsumDOTSBrsum@slimits@
newcommandrsum@mathopmathpalettersum@@relax
newcommandrsum@@[2]reflectbox$m@th#1sum@$
makeatother
begindocument
[
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
]
enddocument
The main idea is to reflect the symbol in the appropriate math style; some bells and whistles for amsmath
have been added.
Should you need also rotated versions, here they are:
documentclassarticle
usepackageamsmath
usepackagegraphicx
makeatletter
newcommandrsumDOTSBrsum@slimits@
newcommandrsum@mathopmathpalettersum@@relax
newcommandrsum@@[2]reflectbox$m@th#1sum@$
newcommandusumDOTSBusum@slimits@
newcommandusum@mathopmathpaletteudsum@@90
newcommanddsumDOTSBdsum@slimits@
newcommanddsum@mathopmathpaletteudsum@@-90
newcommandudsum@@[2]%
vcenter%
sboxz@$m@th#1sum@$%
hbox to wdz@%
hss
resizeboxifxdisplaystyle#1else0.9fiwdz@dimexprhtz@%
rotatebox[origin=c]#2$m@th#1sum@$%
%
hss
%
%
makeatother
begindocument
[
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
]
[
sum_i=1^nusum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nusum_i=1^n
]
[
sum_i=1^ndsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^ndsum_i=1^n
]
enddocument
Can't imagine a sleeker approach showing up. But I'll hold my breath to accept this just yet. Thanks!
â Robert Wolfe
3 hours ago
May be inr
versionrotatebox180
instead ofreflectbox
because of the width of different lines? And similar, in theu
andd
versions, may be those should be a rotation of a reflectbox (or a reflectbox of your rotation)?
â Manuel
3 hours ago
@Manuel I tried the 180 degree rotation, but it's unsatisfying because of the different thickness of the horizontal strokes. All variations are possible, but the 90 degree rotated symbols are just a joke.
â egreg
3 hours ago
It might look stupid for Sigma, but someone might find it useful for a different symbol. I can usually alter a few lines of code from this site to tailor it for my needs. So, extra generality never hurts.
â Robert Wolfe
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Well, it's almost automatic. ;-)
documentclassarticle
usepackageamsmath
usepackagegraphicx
makeatletter
newcommandrsumDOTSBrsum@slimits@
newcommandrsum@mathopmathpalettersum@@relax
newcommandrsum@@[2]reflectbox$m@th#1sum@$
makeatother
begindocument
[
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
]
enddocument
The main idea is to reflect the symbol in the appropriate math style; some bells and whistles for amsmath
have been added.
Should you need also rotated versions, here they are:
documentclassarticle
usepackageamsmath
usepackagegraphicx
makeatletter
newcommandrsumDOTSBrsum@slimits@
newcommandrsum@mathopmathpalettersum@@relax
newcommandrsum@@[2]reflectbox$m@th#1sum@$
newcommandusumDOTSBusum@slimits@
newcommandusum@mathopmathpaletteudsum@@90
newcommanddsumDOTSBdsum@slimits@
newcommanddsum@mathopmathpaletteudsum@@-90
newcommandudsum@@[2]%
vcenter%
sboxz@$m@th#1sum@$%
hbox to wdz@%
hss
resizeboxifxdisplaystyle#1else0.9fiwdz@dimexprhtz@%
rotatebox[origin=c]#2$m@th#1sum@$%
%
hss
%
%
makeatother
begindocument
[
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
]
[
sum_i=1^nusum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nusum_i=1^n
]
[
sum_i=1^ndsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^ndsum_i=1^n
]
enddocument
Can't imagine a sleeker approach showing up. But I'll hold my breath to accept this just yet. Thanks!
â Robert Wolfe
3 hours ago
May be inr
versionrotatebox180
instead ofreflectbox
because of the width of different lines? And similar, in theu
andd
versions, may be those should be a rotation of a reflectbox (or a reflectbox of your rotation)?
â Manuel
3 hours ago
@Manuel I tried the 180 degree rotation, but it's unsatisfying because of the different thickness of the horizontal strokes. All variations are possible, but the 90 degree rotated symbols are just a joke.
â egreg
3 hours ago
It might look stupid for Sigma, but someone might find it useful for a different symbol. I can usually alter a few lines of code from this site to tailor it for my needs. So, extra generality never hurts.
â Robert Wolfe
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Well, it's almost automatic. ;-)
documentclassarticle
usepackageamsmath
usepackagegraphicx
makeatletter
newcommandrsumDOTSBrsum@slimits@
newcommandrsum@mathopmathpalettersum@@relax
newcommandrsum@@[2]reflectbox$m@th#1sum@$
makeatother
begindocument
[
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
]
enddocument
The main idea is to reflect the symbol in the appropriate math style; some bells and whistles for amsmath
have been added.
Should you need also rotated versions, here they are:
documentclassarticle
usepackageamsmath
usepackagegraphicx
makeatletter
newcommandrsumDOTSBrsum@slimits@
newcommandrsum@mathopmathpalettersum@@relax
newcommandrsum@@[2]reflectbox$m@th#1sum@$
newcommandusumDOTSBusum@slimits@
newcommandusum@mathopmathpaletteudsum@@90
newcommanddsumDOTSBdsum@slimits@
newcommanddsum@mathopmathpaletteudsum@@-90
newcommandudsum@@[2]%
vcenter%
sboxz@$m@th#1sum@$%
hbox to wdz@%
hss
resizeboxifxdisplaystyle#1else0.9fiwdz@dimexprhtz@%
rotatebox[origin=c]#2$m@th#1sum@$%
%
hss
%
%
makeatother
begindocument
[
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
]
[
sum_i=1^nusum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nusum_i=1^n
]
[
sum_i=1^ndsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^ndsum_i=1^n
]
enddocument
Can't imagine a sleeker approach showing up. But I'll hold my breath to accept this just yet. Thanks!
â Robert Wolfe
3 hours ago
May be inr
versionrotatebox180
instead ofreflectbox
because of the width of different lines? And similar, in theu
andd
versions, may be those should be a rotation of a reflectbox (or a reflectbox of your rotation)?
â Manuel
3 hours ago
@Manuel I tried the 180 degree rotation, but it's unsatisfying because of the different thickness of the horizontal strokes. All variations are possible, but the 90 degree rotated symbols are just a joke.
â egreg
3 hours ago
It might look stupid for Sigma, but someone might find it useful for a different symbol. I can usually alter a few lines of code from this site to tailor it for my needs. So, extra generality never hurts.
â Robert Wolfe
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Well, it's almost automatic. ;-)
documentclassarticle
usepackageamsmath
usepackagegraphicx
makeatletter
newcommandrsumDOTSBrsum@slimits@
newcommandrsum@mathopmathpalettersum@@relax
newcommandrsum@@[2]reflectbox$m@th#1sum@$
makeatother
begindocument
[
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
]
enddocument
The main idea is to reflect the symbol in the appropriate math style; some bells and whistles for amsmath
have been added.
Should you need also rotated versions, here they are:
documentclassarticle
usepackageamsmath
usepackagegraphicx
makeatletter
newcommandrsumDOTSBrsum@slimits@
newcommandrsum@mathopmathpalettersum@@relax
newcommandrsum@@[2]reflectbox$m@th#1sum@$
newcommandusumDOTSBusum@slimits@
newcommandusum@mathopmathpaletteudsum@@90
newcommanddsumDOTSBdsum@slimits@
newcommanddsum@mathopmathpaletteudsum@@-90
newcommandudsum@@[2]%
vcenter%
sboxz@$m@th#1sum@$%
hbox to wdz@%
hss
resizeboxifxdisplaystyle#1else0.9fiwdz@dimexprhtz@%
rotatebox[origin=c]#2$m@th#1sum@$%
%
hss
%
%
makeatother
begindocument
[
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
]
[
sum_i=1^nusum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nusum_i=1^n
]
[
sum_i=1^ndsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^ndsum_i=1^n
]
enddocument
Well, it's almost automatic. ;-)
documentclassarticle
usepackageamsmath
usepackagegraphicx
makeatletter
newcommandrsumDOTSBrsum@slimits@
newcommandrsum@mathopmathpalettersum@@relax
newcommandrsum@@[2]reflectbox$m@th#1sum@$
makeatother
begindocument
[
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
]
enddocument
The main idea is to reflect the symbol in the appropriate math style; some bells and whistles for amsmath
have been added.
Should you need also rotated versions, here they are:
documentclassarticle
usepackageamsmath
usepackagegraphicx
makeatletter
newcommandrsumDOTSBrsum@slimits@
newcommandrsum@mathopmathpalettersum@@relax
newcommandrsum@@[2]reflectbox$m@th#1sum@$
newcommandusumDOTSBusum@slimits@
newcommandusum@mathopmathpaletteudsum@@90
newcommanddsumDOTSBdsum@slimits@
newcommanddsum@mathopmathpaletteudsum@@-90
newcommandudsum@@[2]%
vcenter%
sboxz@$m@th#1sum@$%
hbox to wdz@%
hss
resizeboxifxdisplaystyle#1else0.9fiwdz@dimexprhtz@%
rotatebox[origin=c]#2$m@th#1sum@$%
%
hss
%
%
makeatother
begindocument
[
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nrsum_i=1^n
]
[
sum_i=1^nusum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^nusum_i=1^n
]
[
sum_i=1^ndsum_i=1^n
qquad
textstyle
sum_i=1^ndsum_i=1^n
]
enddocument
edited 3 hours ago
answered 4 hours ago
egreg
690k8518373086
690k8518373086
Can't imagine a sleeker approach showing up. But I'll hold my breath to accept this just yet. Thanks!
â Robert Wolfe
3 hours ago
May be inr
versionrotatebox180
instead ofreflectbox
because of the width of different lines? And similar, in theu
andd
versions, may be those should be a rotation of a reflectbox (or a reflectbox of your rotation)?
â Manuel
3 hours ago
@Manuel I tried the 180 degree rotation, but it's unsatisfying because of the different thickness of the horizontal strokes. All variations are possible, but the 90 degree rotated symbols are just a joke.
â egreg
3 hours ago
It might look stupid for Sigma, but someone might find it useful for a different symbol. I can usually alter a few lines of code from this site to tailor it for my needs. So, extra generality never hurts.
â Robert Wolfe
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
Can't imagine a sleeker approach showing up. But I'll hold my breath to accept this just yet. Thanks!
â Robert Wolfe
3 hours ago
May be inr
versionrotatebox180
instead ofreflectbox
because of the width of different lines? And similar, in theu
andd
versions, may be those should be a rotation of a reflectbox (or a reflectbox of your rotation)?
â Manuel
3 hours ago
@Manuel I tried the 180 degree rotation, but it's unsatisfying because of the different thickness of the horizontal strokes. All variations are possible, but the 90 degree rotated symbols are just a joke.
â egreg
3 hours ago
It might look stupid for Sigma, but someone might find it useful for a different symbol. I can usually alter a few lines of code from this site to tailor it for my needs. So, extra generality never hurts.
â Robert Wolfe
1 hour ago
Can't imagine a sleeker approach showing up. But I'll hold my breath to accept this just yet. Thanks!
â Robert Wolfe
3 hours ago
Can't imagine a sleeker approach showing up. But I'll hold my breath to accept this just yet. Thanks!
â Robert Wolfe
3 hours ago
May be in
r
version rotatebox180
instead of reflectbox
because of the width of different lines? And similar, in the u
and d
versions, may be those should be a rotation of a reflectbox (or a reflectbox of your rotation)?â Manuel
3 hours ago
May be in
r
version rotatebox180
instead of reflectbox
because of the width of different lines? And similar, in the u
and d
versions, may be those should be a rotation of a reflectbox (or a reflectbox of your rotation)?â Manuel
3 hours ago
@Manuel I tried the 180 degree rotation, but it's unsatisfying because of the different thickness of the horizontal strokes. All variations are possible, but the 90 degree rotated symbols are just a joke.
â egreg
3 hours ago
@Manuel I tried the 180 degree rotation, but it's unsatisfying because of the different thickness of the horizontal strokes. All variations are possible, but the 90 degree rotated symbols are just a joke.
â egreg
3 hours ago
It might look stupid for Sigma, but someone might find it useful for a different symbol. I can usually alter a few lines of code from this site to tailor it for my needs. So, extra generality never hurts.
â Robert Wolfe
1 hour ago
It might look stupid for Sigma, but someone might find it useful for a different symbol. I can usually alter a few lines of code from this site to tailor it for my needs. So, extra generality never hurts.
â Robert Wolfe
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f455749%2freverse-an-existing-big-math-operator-keeping-same-functionality-such-as-limits%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password