I want to get rid of that huge blank space between the displayed equation and "converges to q". I am using a tabularx environment and hence I have to insert an enter (\\) after the displayed equation in order to make the table work properly. How can I get rid of that space?
Since I am working on a huge project and I cannot change the whole thing, I would appreciate if there is a solution that does not change the overall structure (tabularx, \hspace{3em}).
Here's my code.
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[english]{babel}
\usepackage[a4paper,top=2cm,bottom=2cm,left=3cm,right=3cm,marginparwidth=1.75cm]
{geometry}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsthm}
\usepackage{enumitem}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage{indentfirst}
\usepackage{tabularx}
\usepackage{bm}
\usepackage{nicematrix}
\usepackage[colorlinks=true, allcolors=teal]{hyperref}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\begin{document}
\begin{tabularx}{0.9\linewidth}{l@{}c@{}X}
\hypertarget{5.5.1}{\textbf{5.5.1}} & $\quad$ & If $P$ is the transition matrix for a
regular Markov chain, then :
\end{tabularx}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}
\begin{tabularx}{0.9\linewidth}{l@{}c@{}X}
& \hspace{3em} & (a) There is a unique probability vector $\mathbf{q}$ with positive
entries such that \
& \hspace{3em} & \hspace{1.25em} $P \mathbf{p} = \mathbf{q}$. \
& \hspace{3em} & (b) For any initial probability vector $\mathbf{x}{0}$, the sequence
of state vectors
$$ \mathbf{x}{0}, \quad P \mathbf{x}{0}, \quad \cdots, \quad P^{k} \mathbf{x}{0},
\quad \cdots $$ \
& \hspace{3em} & \hspace{1.25em} converges to $\mathbf{q}$. \
& \hspace{3em} & (c) The sequence $P, P^{2}, \cdots, P^{k}, \cdots$ converges to the
matrix $Q$ each of whose \
& \hspace{3em} & \hspace{1.25em} column vectors is $\mathbf{q}$. \
\end{tabularx}
\end{document}


\[ ...\], not$$ ... $$, to create an unnumbered display math group. For more on the is subject, please see Why is\[ ... \]preferable to$$ ... $$? – Mico Feb 26 '23 at 15:53\\after$$. Display structures have space built in below the equation, so you're just adding to it. However, see the answer for better advice. – barbara beeton Mar 28 '23 at 18:14