0

I wrote the code below, but I want to make smaller the \left\vert‎\left(‎\dfrac{1}{16},‎\dfrac{1}{16}‎\right) ‎‎\right‎‎‎\rangle_{1,2}

how should I do that? 

    \documentclass{article} ‎‎
    ‎\usepackage{amsmath}  ‎‎
    ‎\begin{document}

    ‎\begin{align}‎
    \notag &\sum_{\substack{ w,n=‎-\infty‎ \\ N,‎\bar{N}‎}}^{‎\infty‎} ‎‎\langle ‎N,‎\bar{N},w,n‎\mid \,g‎‎\, ‎q^{L_{0}}‎\bar{q}\,^{‎\bar{L}_{0}} \mid ‎N,‎\bar{N},w,n ‎\rangle \\[2ex]
    &‎‎\alpha‎_{-1/2}^{2} \,  \left\vert‎\left(‎\dfrac{1}{16},‎\dfrac{1}{16}‎\right) ‎‎\right‎‎‎\rangle_{1,2}
    \end{align}‎

\end{document}‎‎‎
Karlo
  • 3,257
Farhad Razi
  • 343
  • 1
    align mustn't be used inside of equation Why do you add them together? What do you mean by smaller? Smaller font? – LaRiFaRi Apr 14 '16 at 09:19
  • @ LaRiFaRi, yes smaller font – Farhad Razi Apr 14 '16 at 09:20
  • 2
    Don't use \Big – egreg Apr 14 '16 at 09:21
  • \tnify has no effect in math mode. – Bernard Apr 14 '16 at 09:24
  • @ egreg, I do what you say but it doesn't seem beautiful – Farhad Razi Apr 14 '16 at 09:27
  • @ Bernard, what should I do? – Farhad Razi Apr 14 '16 at 09:29
  • Bernard was having a typo, he meant \tiny. See here: http://tex.stackexchange.com/q/88646 in order to read about the correct syntax for smaller fonts. As egreg says, you should not use \Big when you want something to be smaller. Do the tweaking of parantheses in the end use \bigl( \bigr) and alike. \dfrac is redundant here, you can use \frac as you are already in displaystyle. Taking dfrac here seems strange as you are explicitly asking for a smaller solution. – LaRiFaRi Apr 14 '16 at 09:39

2 Answers2

1

It's not really clear what you want to get; note that \dfrac makes big fractions notwithstanding the current math style. If you want small fractions in an align environment, use \tfrac.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}

\begin{document}
\begin{equation}\label{207}
\begin{aligned}
&\sum_{\substack{w,n=-\infty\\N,\bar{N}}}^{\infty}
   \langle N,\bar{N},w,n\mid gq^{L_{0}}
\bar{q}^{\,\bar{L}_{0}}\mid N,\bar{N},w,n\rangle\\[2ex]
&\alpha_{-1/2}^{2}\bigl|\bigl(\tfrac{1}{16},\tfrac{1}{16}\bigr)\bigr\rangle_{1,2}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\end{document}

Don't add random \, commands; the best for \bar{q}^{xyz} is

\bar{q}^{\,xyz}

instead of \bar{q}\,^{xyz}. Try and see the difference.

enter image description here

egreg
  • 1,121,712
0

Don't do that, it will look ugly. Here is a compromise:

% arara: pdflatex

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{mathtools}

\begin{document}
\begin{equation}‎\label{207}‎‎‎
    ‎\begin{aligned}‎
    \sum_{\mathclap{{\substack{ w,n=‎-\infty‎ \\ N,‎\bar{N}‎}}}}^{\infty} &\langle ‎N,‎\bar{N},w,n‎\mid \,g‎‎\, ‎q^{L_{0}}‎\bar{q}\,^{‎\bar{L}_{0}} \mid ‎N,‎\bar{N},w,n ‎\rangle \\
    &‎‎\langle\alpha‎_{-1/2}^{2} \mid (\tfrac{1}{16},‎\tfrac{1}{16}) \rangle^{}_{1,2}
    \end{aligned}‎
\end{equation}
\end{document}

enter image description here

If the second line is less important, it should not be set in the same equation but in the following text or in an unnumbered equation or alike.

LaRiFaRi
  • 43,807