Command for vector dot with some power











up vote
4
down vote

favorite












So what I am trying to type is the square of the derivative of vector x. I tried dot{vec{x}}^{,2} as well as dot{vec{x}^2}, but the outputs came out to be very offset. Is there a correct way to do this?



The code I used is:



begin{equation}    
L=frac{1}{2} m dot{vec{x^2}}
end{equation}


which give me



enter image description here










share|improve this question









New contributor




Kane Billiot is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • Welcome to TeX.SE! Can you please, as usual here -- show us a short compilable code and an screenshot of your result?
    – Kurt
    1 hour ago















up vote
4
down vote

favorite












So what I am trying to type is the square of the derivative of vector x. I tried dot{vec{x}}^{,2} as well as dot{vec{x}^2}, but the outputs came out to be very offset. Is there a correct way to do this?



The code I used is:



begin{equation}    
L=frac{1}{2} m dot{vec{x^2}}
end{equation}


which give me



enter image description here










share|improve this question









New contributor




Kane Billiot is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • Welcome to TeX.SE! Can you please, as usual here -- show us a short compilable code and an screenshot of your result?
    – Kurt
    1 hour ago













up vote
4
down vote

favorite









up vote
4
down vote

favorite











So what I am trying to type is the square of the derivative of vector x. I tried dot{vec{x}}^{,2} as well as dot{vec{x}^2}, but the outputs came out to be very offset. Is there a correct way to do this?



The code I used is:



begin{equation}    
L=frac{1}{2} m dot{vec{x^2}}
end{equation}


which give me



enter image description here










share|improve this question









New contributor




Kane Billiot is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











So what I am trying to type is the square of the derivative of vector x. I tried dot{vec{x}}^{,2} as well as dot{vec{x}^2}, but the outputs came out to be very offset. Is there a correct way to do this?



The code I used is:



begin{equation}    
L=frac{1}{2} m dot{vec{x^2}}
end{equation}


which give me



enter image description here







math-mode symbols accents






share|improve this question









New contributor




Kane Billiot is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Kane Billiot is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 56 mins ago









Mico

271k30367755




271k30367755






New contributor




Kane Billiot is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 1 hour ago









Kane Billiot

234




234




New contributor




Kane Billiot is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Kane Billiot is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Kane Billiot is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • Welcome to TeX.SE! Can you please, as usual here -- show us a short compilable code and an screenshot of your result?
    – Kurt
    1 hour ago


















  • Welcome to TeX.SE! Can you please, as usual here -- show us a short compilable code and an screenshot of your result?
    – Kurt
    1 hour ago
















Welcome to TeX.SE! Can you please, as usual here -- show us a short compilable code and an screenshot of your result?
– Kurt
1 hour ago




Welcome to TeX.SE! Can you please, as usual here -- show us a short compilable code and an screenshot of your result?
– Kurt
1 hour ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
3
down vote



accepted










I'd probably do



documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath}
begin{document}
begin{equation}
L=frac{1}{2} m Dot{vec{x}}^2
end{equation}
end{document}


enter image description here



because the Lagrange function is a function of the square of the time derivative of x (and not the time derivative of the square of x).






share|improve this answer





















  • That's what I wanted to write, but did not know how to. Thanks.
    – Kane Billiot
    44 mins ago










  • Is there a difference between dot and Dot?
    – Kane Billiot
    42 mins ago










  • @KaneBilliot Short answer: Dot works also when you already have something on top of the symbol. So it would not shift.
    – marmot
    41 mins ago






  • 1




    @marmot - For the case at hand, using dot and Dot produce the same result.
    – Mico
    36 mins ago










  • @Mico Yes, you are right.
    – marmot
    24 mins ago


















up vote
3
down vote













The first or third option below may be close to what you're looking for. Or, switch from Newton-style to Leibniz-style notation for the derivative, as shown by the fourth option (newly fixed to incorporated @marmot's comment). A separate comment: to make the frac{1}{2} term less visually dominant, consider using tfrac instead of frac.



enter image description here



documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath} % for tfrac macro and general accent-placement support
begin{document}
[
tfrac{1}{2}m dot{vec{x}} ^2 quad
tfrac{1}{2}m{dot{vec{x}}}^2 quad
tfrac{1}{2}m{dot{vec{x}}}^{,2} quad
tfrac{1}{2}mbigl(tfrac{mathrm{d}vec{x}}{mathrm{d}t}bigr)^{!2}
]
end{document}





share|improve this answer























  • @marmot - I know. :-) But sometimes dot-notation becomes so involved that switching to Leibniz-style notation makes things easier...
    – Mico
    39 mins ago






  • 1




    @marmot - Many thanks for this clarification. I've updated the code to make the d's upright.
    – Mico
    21 mins ago











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',
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
});


}
});






Kane Billiot is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f463627%2fcommand-for-vector-dot-with-some-power%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








up vote
3
down vote



accepted










I'd probably do



documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath}
begin{document}
begin{equation}
L=frac{1}{2} m Dot{vec{x}}^2
end{equation}
end{document}


enter image description here



because the Lagrange function is a function of the square of the time derivative of x (and not the time derivative of the square of x).






share|improve this answer





















  • That's what I wanted to write, but did not know how to. Thanks.
    – Kane Billiot
    44 mins ago










  • Is there a difference between dot and Dot?
    – Kane Billiot
    42 mins ago










  • @KaneBilliot Short answer: Dot works also when you already have something on top of the symbol. So it would not shift.
    – marmot
    41 mins ago






  • 1




    @marmot - For the case at hand, using dot and Dot produce the same result.
    – Mico
    36 mins ago










  • @Mico Yes, you are right.
    – marmot
    24 mins ago















up vote
3
down vote



accepted










I'd probably do



documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath}
begin{document}
begin{equation}
L=frac{1}{2} m Dot{vec{x}}^2
end{equation}
end{document}


enter image description here



because the Lagrange function is a function of the square of the time derivative of x (and not the time derivative of the square of x).






share|improve this answer





















  • That's what I wanted to write, but did not know how to. Thanks.
    – Kane Billiot
    44 mins ago










  • Is there a difference between dot and Dot?
    – Kane Billiot
    42 mins ago










  • @KaneBilliot Short answer: Dot works also when you already have something on top of the symbol. So it would not shift.
    – marmot
    41 mins ago






  • 1




    @marmot - For the case at hand, using dot and Dot produce the same result.
    – Mico
    36 mins ago










  • @Mico Yes, you are right.
    – marmot
    24 mins ago













up vote
3
down vote



accepted







up vote
3
down vote



accepted






I'd probably do



documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath}
begin{document}
begin{equation}
L=frac{1}{2} m Dot{vec{x}}^2
end{equation}
end{document}


enter image description here



because the Lagrange function is a function of the square of the time derivative of x (and not the time derivative of the square of x).






share|improve this answer












I'd probably do



documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath}
begin{document}
begin{equation}
L=frac{1}{2} m Dot{vec{x}}^2
end{equation}
end{document}


enter image description here



because the Lagrange function is a function of the square of the time derivative of x (and not the time derivative of the square of x).







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 45 mins ago









marmot

81.3k491173




81.3k491173












  • That's what I wanted to write, but did not know how to. Thanks.
    – Kane Billiot
    44 mins ago










  • Is there a difference between dot and Dot?
    – Kane Billiot
    42 mins ago










  • @KaneBilliot Short answer: Dot works also when you already have something on top of the symbol. So it would not shift.
    – marmot
    41 mins ago






  • 1




    @marmot - For the case at hand, using dot and Dot produce the same result.
    – Mico
    36 mins ago










  • @Mico Yes, you are right.
    – marmot
    24 mins ago


















  • That's what I wanted to write, but did not know how to. Thanks.
    – Kane Billiot
    44 mins ago










  • Is there a difference between dot and Dot?
    – Kane Billiot
    42 mins ago










  • @KaneBilliot Short answer: Dot works also when you already have something on top of the symbol. So it would not shift.
    – marmot
    41 mins ago






  • 1




    @marmot - For the case at hand, using dot and Dot produce the same result.
    – Mico
    36 mins ago










  • @Mico Yes, you are right.
    – marmot
    24 mins ago
















That's what I wanted to write, but did not know how to. Thanks.
– Kane Billiot
44 mins ago




That's what I wanted to write, but did not know how to. Thanks.
– Kane Billiot
44 mins ago












Is there a difference between dot and Dot?
– Kane Billiot
42 mins ago




Is there a difference between dot and Dot?
– Kane Billiot
42 mins ago












@KaneBilliot Short answer: Dot works also when you already have something on top of the symbol. So it would not shift.
– marmot
41 mins ago




@KaneBilliot Short answer: Dot works also when you already have something on top of the symbol. So it would not shift.
– marmot
41 mins ago




1




1




@marmot - For the case at hand, using dot and Dot produce the same result.
– Mico
36 mins ago




@marmot - For the case at hand, using dot and Dot produce the same result.
– Mico
36 mins ago












@Mico Yes, you are right.
– marmot
24 mins ago




@Mico Yes, you are right.
– marmot
24 mins ago










up vote
3
down vote













The first or third option below may be close to what you're looking for. Or, switch from Newton-style to Leibniz-style notation for the derivative, as shown by the fourth option (newly fixed to incorporated @marmot's comment). A separate comment: to make the frac{1}{2} term less visually dominant, consider using tfrac instead of frac.



enter image description here



documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath} % for tfrac macro and general accent-placement support
begin{document}
[
tfrac{1}{2}m dot{vec{x}} ^2 quad
tfrac{1}{2}m{dot{vec{x}}}^2 quad
tfrac{1}{2}m{dot{vec{x}}}^{,2} quad
tfrac{1}{2}mbigl(tfrac{mathrm{d}vec{x}}{mathrm{d}t}bigr)^{!2}
]
end{document}





share|improve this answer























  • @marmot - I know. :-) But sometimes dot-notation becomes so involved that switching to Leibniz-style notation makes things easier...
    – Mico
    39 mins ago






  • 1




    @marmot - Many thanks for this clarification. I've updated the code to make the d's upright.
    – Mico
    21 mins ago















up vote
3
down vote













The first or third option below may be close to what you're looking for. Or, switch from Newton-style to Leibniz-style notation for the derivative, as shown by the fourth option (newly fixed to incorporated @marmot's comment). A separate comment: to make the frac{1}{2} term less visually dominant, consider using tfrac instead of frac.



enter image description here



documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath} % for tfrac macro and general accent-placement support
begin{document}
[
tfrac{1}{2}m dot{vec{x}} ^2 quad
tfrac{1}{2}m{dot{vec{x}}}^2 quad
tfrac{1}{2}m{dot{vec{x}}}^{,2} quad
tfrac{1}{2}mbigl(tfrac{mathrm{d}vec{x}}{mathrm{d}t}bigr)^{!2}
]
end{document}





share|improve this answer























  • @marmot - I know. :-) But sometimes dot-notation becomes so involved that switching to Leibniz-style notation makes things easier...
    – Mico
    39 mins ago






  • 1




    @marmot - Many thanks for this clarification. I've updated the code to make the d's upright.
    – Mico
    21 mins ago













up vote
3
down vote










up vote
3
down vote









The first or third option below may be close to what you're looking for. Or, switch from Newton-style to Leibniz-style notation for the derivative, as shown by the fourth option (newly fixed to incorporated @marmot's comment). A separate comment: to make the frac{1}{2} term less visually dominant, consider using tfrac instead of frac.



enter image description here



documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath} % for tfrac macro and general accent-placement support
begin{document}
[
tfrac{1}{2}m dot{vec{x}} ^2 quad
tfrac{1}{2}m{dot{vec{x}}}^2 quad
tfrac{1}{2}m{dot{vec{x}}}^{,2} quad
tfrac{1}{2}mbigl(tfrac{mathrm{d}vec{x}}{mathrm{d}t}bigr)^{!2}
]
end{document}





share|improve this answer














The first or third option below may be close to what you're looking for. Or, switch from Newton-style to Leibniz-style notation for the derivative, as shown by the fourth option (newly fixed to incorporated @marmot's comment). A separate comment: to make the frac{1}{2} term less visually dominant, consider using tfrac instead of frac.



enter image description here



documentclass{article}
usepackage{amsmath} % for tfrac macro and general accent-placement support
begin{document}
[
tfrac{1}{2}m dot{vec{x}} ^2 quad
tfrac{1}{2}m{dot{vec{x}}}^2 quad
tfrac{1}{2}m{dot{vec{x}}}^{,2} quad
tfrac{1}{2}mbigl(tfrac{mathrm{d}vec{x}}{mathrm{d}t}bigr)^{!2}
]
end{document}






share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 22 mins ago

























answered 43 mins ago









Mico

271k30367755




271k30367755












  • @marmot - I know. :-) But sometimes dot-notation becomes so involved that switching to Leibniz-style notation makes things easier...
    – Mico
    39 mins ago






  • 1




    @marmot - Many thanks for this clarification. I've updated the code to make the d's upright.
    – Mico
    21 mins ago


















  • @marmot - I know. :-) But sometimes dot-notation becomes so involved that switching to Leibniz-style notation makes things easier...
    – Mico
    39 mins ago






  • 1




    @marmot - Many thanks for this clarification. I've updated the code to make the d's upright.
    – Mico
    21 mins ago
















@marmot - I know. :-) But sometimes dot-notation becomes so involved that switching to Leibniz-style notation makes things easier...
– Mico
39 mins ago




@marmot - I know. :-) But sometimes dot-notation becomes so involved that switching to Leibniz-style notation makes things easier...
– Mico
39 mins ago




1




1




@marmot - Many thanks for this clarification. I've updated the code to make the d's upright.
– Mico
21 mins ago




@marmot - Many thanks for this clarification. I've updated the code to make the d's upright.
– Mico
21 mins ago










Kane Billiot is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










draft saved

draft discarded


















Kane Billiot is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













Kane Billiot is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












Kane Billiot is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















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.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • 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%2f463627%2fcommand-for-vector-dot-with-some-power%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

Costa Masnaga

Fotorealismo

Sidney Franklin