Lowering the subscript

zugzwang

unread,

Jan 21, 2010, 7:41:08 PM1/21/10

to

In inline math mode (not display style), $N_1$ and $m_r$ look good but
$m_1$ has the subscript too high, relative to the "m". My initial
try

\newcommand{\lowsub}[1]%
{\ensuremath\raisebox{-.6\height}{#1}}%
...
$m_{\lowsub{1}}$

fails because raisebox (for some reason) ignores that a subscript is
being written and uses a larger font than is appropriate.

Varying this with $m_{{}_{\lowsub{1}}}$ surprisingly fails for the
same reason.

My next try

\newcommand{\lowsub}[1]%
{\ensuremath\scriptstyle\raisebox{-.6\height}{#1}}%

similarly fails. I reject

$m_{{}_1}$

because that affect's the subscript's size. Considering that my
documents begin

\large

for my eyesight, the only way that I've been able to lower the
subscript without affecting its size is by kludging:

...
\newcommand{\lowsub}[1]%
{{\footnotesize\raisebox{-.6\height}{$#1$}}}%
...
$m$\lowsub{1}

I have to leave math mode temporarily so that lowsub's fontchanging
command can take effect. I experimented with the relsize package's
relsize and mathsmaller commands (in conjunction with raisebox).
Although using the relsize command is a little cleaner,

\newcommand{\lowsub}[1]%
{\relsize{-2}\raisebox{-.6\height}{$#1$}\relsize{2}}%

Unfortunately, I'm also using

...
% math spacing
\setlength{\mathsurround}{\widthof{\;}}
\newcommand{\hms}{\hspace*{-1\mathsurround}}
...

so going in and out of math mode kludgies:

$m$\hms\hms\lowsub{1}\hms$ = 17$...

and translating something like $\pmod{m_1}$ is worse.

Using \mathsmaller via

\newcommand{\lowsub}[1]%
{\ensuremath\mathsmaller\raisebox{-.6\height}{#1}}%
$m_{\lowsub{1}}$

resulted in a compile error: Argument of \raisebox has an extra }.

I don't have the skill to hack ..\tex\latex\ltxmisc\relsize.sty.
Also, discarding raisebox in favor of the Tex primitive \lower does
not seem to help.

Does anyone have a way of lowering the subscript without affecting its
size or leaving inline math mode? Although the AMS package gives many
math options (e.g. \mathsurround, \nolimits), I couldn't find any
option that determines how low the subscript is typeset.

coo...@nospam.verizon.net

unread,

Jan 21, 2010, 8:30:27 PM1/21/10

to

I use the following trick:

\def\ds{\rule{0pt}{1.5ex}}

Then, something like $\delta_{\ds R}$ looks better (to me) than $\delta_R$.

Martin Heller

unread,

Jan 21, 2010, 8:35:19 PM1/21/10

to

zugzwang wrote:
> In inline math mode (not display style), $N_1$ and $m_r$ look good but
> $m_1$ has the subscript too high, relative to the "m". My initial
> try

Use $m^{}_l$

\documentclass{article}
\begin{document}

In inline math mode (not display style), $N_1$ and $m_r$ look good but

$m_1$ has the subscript too high.

In inline math mode (not display style), $N_1$ and $m_r$ look good but

$m^{}_1$ has the subscript too high.
\end{document}

or look at package subdepth <www.ctan.org/pkg/subdepth>.
Alternatively, change \fontdimen16 and \fontdimen17 yourself.

zugzwang

unread,

Jan 22, 2010, 8:10:43 AM1/22/10

to

Thanks for both of your responses. This forum thread taught me a few
things.

zugzwang

unread,

Jan 22, 2010, 10:45:05 AM1/22/10

to

In addition to lowering the subscript in $m_1$, I also want to raise
the superscript in $N_1^2$ and still keep its subscript "tucked in".
I settled on the kludgy:

...
% variable strut for vertical adjustment
% of subscripts and superscripts.
\newcommand{\vs}[1]{\rule{0pt}{#1ex}}
...
$m_{\vs{1.5} 1}$
${\vs{2} N}_{\! 1}^2$

Joris

unread,

Jan 22, 2010, 11:37:16 AM1/22/10

to

Here's some code for a similar problem, which was provided to me on
this forum.

\newcommand\tr{{\mathpalette\raiseT{\intercal}}}
\newcommand\raiseT[2]{\raisebox{0.25ex}{$#1#2$}}

$x^\tr$ puts the intercal symbol in the right place and makes it the
right size.

Donald Arseneau

unread,

Jan 22, 2010, 2:35:28 PM1/22/10

to

There is a package to adjust superscript and subscript positions
to be "better", perhaps, without kludgy struts. Let's see... it is
called
"subdepth". Try it.

Will Robertson

unread,

Jan 23, 2010, 7:38:50 AM1/23/10

to

On 2010-01-23 06:05:28 +1030, Donald Arseneau <as...@triumf.ca> said:

> There is a package to adjust superscript and subscript positions
> to be "better", perhaps, without kludgy struts. Let's see... it is
> called
> "subdepth". Try it.

Even though I never managed to incorporate all of your suggestions
before my brain was swept along with other things.

Still much more I wanted to do in that package (such as configuring the
amount of shifting for the subscripts and the superscripts) but ...
well, you know.

W