1. ## Angstroms in LaTeX

Some time ago someone asked how to obtain the symbol for Angstrom units
using LaTeX. Well its not elegant but:

$\displaystyle {\buildrel _{\circ} \over {\mathrm{A}}}$

is generated by: {\buildrel _{\circ} \over {\mathrm{A}}}

I suspect some of the braces are redundant.

RonL

2. Originally Posted by CaptainBlack
Some time ago someone asked how to obtain the symbol for Angstrom units
using LaTeX. Well its not elegant but:

$\displaystyle {\buildrel _{\circ} \over {\mathrm{A}}}$

is generated by: {\buildrel _{\circ} \over {\mathrm{A}}}

I suspect some of the braces are redundant.

RonL
\buildrel _\circ \over {\mathrm{A}}
Works too.

Problem is this is math forum nobody uses angstroms.

3. There is a simple command to produce a circle above a letter, but it doesn't look to good above a capital A. Click to see the code:

$\displaystyle \r{A}\r{o}$

This is another one, math-style, and seems to work well for A too:

$\displaystyle \mathring{A}\mathring{o}$

4. Originally Posted by TD!
There is a simple command to produce a circle above a letter, but it doesn't look to good above a capital A. Click to see the code:

$\displaystyle \r{A}\r{o}$

This is another one, math-style, and seems to work well for A too:

$\displaystyle \mathring{A}\mathring{o}$
It is "proper" to unslant your A.

5. Originally Posted by TD!
There is a simple command to produce a circle above a letter, but it doesn't look to good above a capital A. Click to see the code:

$\displaystyle \r{A}\r{o}$

This is another one, math-style, and seems to work well for A too:

$\displaystyle \mathring{A}\mathring{o}$
$\displaystyle \r{\rm A} \r{\rm o}$

6. Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker
It is "proper" to unslant your A.
Then use the addition above, still a lot shorter

7. Originally Posted by TD!
Then use the addition above, still a lot shorter
I resent reference to my dimunitive stature

RonL

8. Originally Posted by CaptainBlack
I resent reference to my dimunitive stature

RonL
I'm sorry

9. easier: just use \AA

you don't need mathmode or anything

Isa

10. Originally Posted by Isa
easier: just use \AA

you don't need mathmode or anything

Isa
$\displaystyle \AA$

11. Originally Posted by mr fantastic
$\displaystyle \AA$
$\displaystyle \text{\AA}$

$$\text{\AA}$$

.

12. hm seems it only does work without mathsurrounding in german version as i use miktex/latex or maybe i installed a package that supports this command

13. Originally Posted by Isa
hm seems it only does work without mathsurrounding in german version as i use miktex/latex or maybe i installed a package that supports this command
The  tags are only required on this site. In a LateX document it requires no such tags (and the \text{} should not be needed other that in math mode).

.

14. ## Re: Angstroms in LaTeX

Angstrom is a unit of length .... please do not use (never, NEVER EVER) italic units
they have to be outside of math-enviroment or you make them non-italic (e.g.: $\mathrm{}$)

Thus, \AA in text enviroment is the most suitable solution .... furthermore, do not forget the "\," between number and unit, else you cold have to fight on linebreaks and so on (e.g.: 123\,\AA).

Regards

15. ## Re: Angstroms in LaTeX

I'm not poking fun at your comment, but you are aware that this thread is 5 years old?

-Dan

Page 1 of 2 12 Last

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

# How to write mathematical expression amstrom in latax

Click on a term to search for related topics.