# MathCAD or something similar??



## wurf (Feb 25, 2003)

Hi!

I'm using an iBook at school, and most of the time I need a program to write equations. I've already installed MS Office X but there's not even an equation editor like in the Win-Version!

My favourite is MathCAD, but it seems to be very expensive therefore I'm searching for a free program, running with OS X.
It would be very helpful if you could give me some tips, cause I've been a WIN and Linux User up to now! I would also be happy if anyone knows an equation editor for MS Office X.

Much thanks for your time,

Michi


----------



## bobw (Feb 25, 2003)

Search http://www.versiontracker.com for CAD. I'm sure you'll find something you can use, freely or pretty cheap.


----------



## mac-blog (Feb 25, 2003)

http://www.livemath.com/


----------



## lurk (Feb 25, 2003)

*cough* LaTeX *cough*

It is what us real(tm) mathematicians use


----------



## wyvern (Feb 25, 2003)

Yes, LaTeX is great.

Mathematica can also do typesetting, though...
Give it a try. The student version is only $90 or so.


----------



## RacerX (Feb 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by lurk _
> *It is what us real(tm) mathematicians use  *



Okay, I'll bite... how do you define _real(tm) mathematicians_?

In my day (as if that was all that long ago), being able to produce math that earned the respect of respected *real mathematicians* (say like... Fields Medalist, of which I've worked with three) was always a good measure. Getting paid to do real math was even better (like from the NSF, DOE, and even some engineers  ... I had to pay for classes and books some how).


----------



## wyvern (Feb 26, 2003)

People who do math for a living...
Or those who wish to, I guess. That'd be me.


----------



## masternew (Feb 26, 2003)

Actually my M$ Office did come with a program called Microsoft Equation, which I used in Word to do my equations and formulas.

I think you can add it is in your office x disc, look under extras and you will find it.


----------



## lurk (Feb 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by RacerX _
> *Okay, I'll bite... how do you define real(tm) mathematicians?
> 
> In my day (as if that was all that long ago), being able to produce math that earned the respect of respected real mathematicians (say like... Fields Medalist, of which I've worked with three) was always a good measure. Getting paid to do real math was even better (like from the NSF, DOE, and even some engineers  ... I had to pay for classes and books some how). *



Well I did have my FM (M.S. in USA) in math before I jumped ship to computer science (actually I still kinda sit in the intersection of the two).  But I guess that I may have sullied my reputation as a mathematician that way   Anyhow math is just like anything else I have known lots of real mathematicians (and would count myself in that number) as well as real biologists, physicits, and journalists.  Funny thing is there wasn't a Nobel, Pulitzer or a Turing award in the lot.  (Well I have met Pauling and Erdos but I didn't *know* them in any sense of the word)  I guess that you run in better circles than I do 

As for the LaTeX thing almost everyone I knew used TeX or LaTeX for real math and it was second nature.  We would use it in boring old ASCII email to make something more specific and not even miss a beat.  Think about if you had to type by clicking on the little letters in that character picker thingy, that is exactly what using an equation editor is like.  If I am typing and want to enter something simple like $\sum_{i=1}^{42}\alpha_i$ in LaTeX it comes out just about as fast as I would be able to read it aloud.  Not quite as fast as I type English text but not bad...now if I had to use the clicky pallet thingy...

It may just be a bias on my part but if I am reading a paper in Word or LaTeX the latter tend to be much more mathematically rigorous in the presentation of their work.  The "math" included in Word articles is usually simpler and less relevent to the actual point.  However, that may be more of a reflection on the style and personality of the different research subcultures.   However, I think that there is a little bit of Sapir-Wharf going on as well;  if it is expensive/difficult to  be mathematically precise in your communication then you will obviously sacrifice some of that rigour in the interest of efficiency.  The original research may well have be equally rigorous but the presentation is not.

I have been working with a set of cognitive scientists of late and I can clearly see this effect  now that I have to use Word 'cause everyone else does.  Equations and floating figures are simply not maintained as part of working documents.  That is something reserved for the final pass before it is "done" because it is too hard to maintain them in a living document and it is too time consuming to create them willy nilly.  Sure we can delete 800 words of text without blinking but not that goofy 8 element equation...

Hi my name is Eric and I am a bitter LaTeX refugee awash in a sea of Word


----------



## RacerX (Feb 26, 2003)

Here is an example of the first paper I wrote when in school. The original (pre-PDF form) was created in MS Word 5.1 with help from Expressionist (which is now Theorist Interactive's MathEQ) and images generated in Theorist (which is now Theorist Interactive's Live Math Maker) all on a Macintosh SE/30.

Are you saying that this looks like a less _mathematically rigorous_ presentation?

Besides, if I couldn't present my work I surely wouldn't have garnered the attention of the people who took me under their wings. I have found that you can become known very quickly in math circles via word of mouth (or at least in the area of differential topology, it could be different for other people in other areas).

Besides, most of my communications back then were via snail-mail. The person who was supervising my work was at SUNY-Stony Brook while I was at UCSD. Plus, I didn't like computers much back then.  It wasn't like they could help me with the type of math I was doing (funny, they still can't  ).


----------



## lurk (Feb 28, 2003)

I think that I must have offended you or I am being trolled...



> _Originally posted by RacerX _
> *Here is an example of the first paper I wrote when in school. The original (pre-PDF form) was created in MS Word 5.1 with help from Expressionist (which is now Theorist Interactive's MathEQ) and images generated in Theorist (which is now Theorist Interactive's Live Math Maker) all on a Macintosh SE/30.
> 
> Are you saying that this looks like a less mathematically rigorous presentation?
> *



No, it looks quite nice.  If you had used an equation array you could have gotten the = signs in the multiline equations to line up 

I was generating documents with Word and Wordperfect at the same time and it was a bear.  I still remember that if I inlined a formula with a subscript and a superscript it would through the vertical spacing for the whole line off.  I even spent time on tech support and filed a bug against it at the time thinking it was just my stupidity.  Thankfully it was soon after that I was told about (La)TeX which just produced beautiful math... with no contortions or sacrificial chickens.

I guess my point is that I know you worked hard on that and you did a good job but you shouldn't have had to invest so much effort in it that you feel the need to defend it 11 years later.  



> *
> Besides, if I couldn't present my work I surely wouldn't have garnered the attention of the people who took me under their wings. I have found that you can become known very quickly in math circles via word of mouth (or at least in the area of differential topology, it could be different for other people in other areas).
> *



It has been my experience that no research community is ever really much bigger than that since if it was it will fragment into smaller subgroups.  But then again I may be wrong.



> *
> Besides, most of my communications back then were via snail-mail. The person who was supervising my work was at SUNY-Stony Brook while I was at UCSD. Plus, I didn't like computers much back then.  It wasn't like they could help me with the type of math I was doing (funny, they still can't  ). *



I still do all of my math related work with a fountain pen on light quarter inch graph paper.  (I like the proportions better than regular lined paper...) Computers can't really help with intersting math problems anyway (That ought to set off the witch hunt...)

Finally, I honestly did not mean to disparage your work or anyone's.  But just for giggles go and set down with a random set of conference proceedings in computer science and look at the differences between the Word and LaTeX papers.  I think that you will see my claims of tendencies in presentation  across the different populations to be born out. Of course such an evaluation would be pointless in a pure math area like differential topology since all one has there is rigour.

-Eric


----------



## RacerX (Mar 1, 2003)

I would scarcely call what I'm doing trolling. I was only pointing out that _real mathematicians_ do real math, no matter what they use to produce it. TeX has been a nice addition to the community, but before that there was real math being done.

I have seen many of the original versions of my professors original works (before being typeset for publication). Having the = line up would not have changed the content. And even using TeX, I've seen preprints of that had formatting... irregularities (Professor Thurston's 1994 preprint of his 1997 book comes to mind, though the idea was to catch that type of stuff).

My _defense_ was not of the work I put into setting up that paper, but the fact that there is always room for alternatives. Surely you as a Mac user can see that there are always alternative ways of doing things. And what works for others may or may not be the best fit for you. This is really no different.

Over the last few years of posting in forums and making web pages I have become comfortable with the idea of writing in that fashion. When I return to my studies I'll most likely write everything using LaTeX. But again, that should not detract from that existence of alternatives for those who want them.

Going back over a number of my later papers, knowing what I know now (and what I am comfortable with now), I can see that writing would be far easier for me using LaTeX (as seen in example2.jpg). But back then, I really didn't have the time to spend learning something like that. My research required almost all of my time (big reason why my first wife left me no doubt).

Still, like you I spent most of my time with pin and paper. The only difference was that I tend to use unlined paper with a grid page underneath. If I did have to show anyone my work I didn't want anything else but the ink on the page to be there.


----------



## chabig (Mar 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by masternew _
> *Actually my M$ Office did come with a program called Microsoft Equation, which I used in Word to do my equations and formulas.
> 
> I think you can add it is in your office x disc, look under extras and you will find it. *



Let's not get sidetracked. Masternew is right, Office X does ship with an equation editor. Mine is called "Equation Editor" and it's in the Office folder. Take another look at your install CD.

Chris


----------



## wurf (Mar 12, 2003)

Thanks a lot for all your answers, I use the equation editor of apple works now. It also works with ms office x. For more complicated things I use Mathcad (I had the win-version) which I have installed with vpc6.

Michi


----------



## nicohirtt (Mar 26, 2011)

I recommend trying EureKalc 3, a free and open source environment for numeric and symbolic calculation, dedicated to solving problems in the field of physics, mathematics, engineering...

Homepage : http://web.me.com/nicohirtt/EureKalc/


----------

