I believe the unexpected ess-zett shows up because \rm
is not a command that takes an argument but, instead, a switch: all subsequent material (until either some other font-changing command is encountered or until the current (math) environment ends) is instructed to show up in "roman" mode. It just so happens that the text-mode glyph that's in the same spot of the respective font table where \pi
would be in the math mode font table happens to be the ess-zett.
Rather than using \rm
-- which is a holdover from (Plain) TeX and is only barely supported by LaTeX -- you really should use either the \text
macro of the amsmath
package (which you're already loading anyway, it would appear) and/or create a few dedicated macros, such as
\newcommand\rad{\text{rad}} % `\text` is a macro provided by the amsmath package
\newcommand\second{\text{sec}}
\newcommand\cm{\text{cm}}
and then write
\begin{align*}
&= (100\,\rad/\second)(20\,\cm)(\sin(\pi/2))
\end{align*}
which will give you the output you'd expect to get. (Aside: You should probably write "s" rather than "sec" for second...)
Addendum Better still, consider loading the siunitx package, e.g., with the instruction
\usepackage[mode=text,per-mode=symbol]{siunitx}
(as well as, of course, the amsmath
, eulervm
, and bookman
packages). Then you could write the expression in question as
\begin{align*}
&= (\SI{100}{\radian\per\second})(\SI{20}{\centi\meter})(\sin(\pi/2))
\end{align*}
and you'd automatically get a proper "thin-space" between the numerals and the associate units.
Finally, you mention encountering some problems with \mathbf
; that works for (Latin) letters but not for other symbols (including various Greek letters). Use \boldsymbol
for the latter symbols.
(This is a more-or-less complete re-write of an answer given earlier, after I discovered the varg
option of the newtxmath
and newpxmath
packages.)
You mention that you would like to typeset your document using Times Roman text and math fonts. The newtxmath
and newtxtext
packages -- much evolved and improved versions of the old txfonts
package -- recognize the option varg
to specify a "single-story" italic-g math character. In the MWE below, g
produces a single-story math-italics "g" character, while \git
produces a double-story italics-g character. The "ordinary" (upright, "Roman") g is shown for comparison.
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{newtxtext}
\usepackage[varg]{newtxmath}
\newcommand\git{\textit{g}}
\begin{document}
g $\git$ $g$
\end{document}
You may also want to give the packages newpxtext
and newpxmath
a try. They are of fairly recent vintage, constituting a re-implementation of the pxfonts
package which brought the Palatino
font family to LaTeX. If you replace the two instances of "newtx" in the MWE above with "newpx", you get the following output:
Best Answer
If using either XeLaTeX or LuaLaTeX is an option for you, you may want to use the
Cambria Math
font.The following table contrasts the looks of
w
and\omega
, as well as looks of the notoriously-similar triplev
,\upsilon
, and\nu
. Clearly,w
and\omega
are very different ifCambria Math
is loaded. Pagella, a Palatino clone, arguably does a credible job as well distinguishting these two characters. (If you must usev
,\upsilon
, and\nu
in one document, Pagella is your best bet. My recommendation, though, is simply not to use\upsilon
.)If you decide to go with the Palatino clone, you could use it under pdfLaTeX by loading the packages
newpxtext
andnewpxmath
.