On 05/15/2001 at 03:04 PM, Lars Hellström <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>I math fonts something like that could be used to handle the choice
>between \epsilon and \varepsilon. As I understand it, these are
>semantically equivalenti.e., people will think you've done something
>wrong if you try to use them both in the same formula to mean different
>things
>
Some might, but most (at least in the parts of math I read) wouldn't. The
general rule of thumb seems to be: if they look different, they are
(mathematically) different. In my experience, more mathematicians would
think it wrong to try and claim \epsilon and \varepsilon did mean the same,
and I know some journal editors that would change it. Note that \in is
merely a stylized \epsilon, but is mathematically distinct from all the
other "epsilon" variants nowadays. (Before the standardization of the \in
symbol, \epsilon was used to mean "is an element of"  and sometimes to
also be the classical analysis "epsilon" in the same formula!)

Phil Parker

URL http://www.math.twsu.edu/Faculty/Parker/
Random quote:
Reality is an obstacle to hallucination.
