Talk:De Bruijn's theorem

Formatting inline math
I reduced the size of the inline math using \scriptstyle. I know it creates problems with some of the characters, but overall I think the article looks better. However, if you don't like it feel free to reverse it. Here is a comparison of some choices using different approaches:
 * 1) (display LaTex) The second of de Bruijn's results concerns the case in which each side of the brick is a multiple of the next smaller side: there exists a sequence of numbers $$c_1,c_2,\dots c_d$$ such that $$a_1=c_1$$, $$a_2=c_1c_2$$, $$a_3=c_1c_2c_3$$, and more generally $$a_i=\prod_{j=1}^i c_j$$.
 * 2) (scriptstyle LaTeX) The second of de Bruijn's results concerns the case in which each side of the brick is a multiple of the next smaller side: there exists a sequence of numbers $$\scriptstyle c_1,c_2,\dots c_d$$ such that $$\scriptstyle a_1=c_1$$, $$\scriptstyle a_2=c_1c_2$$, $$\scriptstyle a_3=c_1c_2c_3$$, and more generally $$\scriptstyle a_i=\prod_{j=1}^i c_j$$.
 * 3) (math template) The second of de Bruijn's results concerns the case in which each side of the brick is a multiple of the next smaller side: there exists a sequence of numbers $c_{1},c_{2}, ... c_{d}$ such that $a_{1}=c_{1}$, $a_{2}=c_{1}c_{2}$, $a_{3} = c_{1}c_{2}c_{3}$, and more generally
 * $$ a_i=\prod_{j=1}^i c_j.$$

I cheated and broke out the product symbol on a separate line because it's hard to implement with math. RockMagnetist (talk) 02:34, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I have mathjax turned on in my user preferences; apparently, from your examples, using \scriptstyle makes no difference there (perhaps it recognizes math in inline text and turns on scriptstyle automatically in that case?) However, using math looks significantly worse to me. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:52, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I tried turning on mathjax and get a similar result. I think I tried mathjax some time ago and got some real messes; maybe it has since been improved. However, a lot of people won't have it turned on, so you might want to experiment with turning it off temporarily. If the LaTeX environment always looked better, I would happily abandon math. RockMagnetist (talk) 04:10, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * When mathjax first became available, there was a severe bug that made it impossible to use ampersands or less than signs in math. That has since been fixed, though. Now the worst remaining problem I know about is some extra cruft it adds to the end of a citation or cite journal template if you try to use within a title. Anyway, thanks for improving the default appearance. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * There are also examples where some symbols overlap each other (see equation 10 in Demagnetizing field). You're welcome. RockMagnetist (talk) 04:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Name of theorem
Shouldn't it be de Bruijn's theorem? RockMagnetist (talk) 04:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * My understanding of the Dutch name particles like "de" is that they are capitalized the same as most English words: lower case in the middle of a sentence, capitalized at the start of a sentence (or the start of an article's title). —David Eppstein (talk) 05:47, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that is probably right. I have corrected a couple in the middles of sentences. RockMagnetist (talk) 05:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)