Typesetting a double Over Dot on top of a symbol












6












$begingroup$


I wanted to make a notation with a double dot over a symbol in Mathematica. Searching online or in the documentation did not yield any results. However, just randomly attempting to give a second parameter to the OverDot function surprisingly did exactly what I needed:



enter image description here



I assume the red font suggests that Mathematica perceives this as a syntax mistake at some level, even though the output is as desired. Unfortunately, this does not work for three dots and more.




Is there a proper way to do this without red font appearing?







formatting







share|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    {Overscript[x, ".."], Overscript[x, "..."], Overscript[x, "[Ellipsis]"]}
    $endgroup$
    – Bob Hanlon
    2 days ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    The code editor and documentation are not always completely in sync with the actual typesetting. This is only one of several examples. Ignore the code coloring.
    $endgroup$
    – m_goldberg
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    @BobHanlon as a German speaker I perceive your Overscript[x, ".."] Umlaut to be very improperly typeset. Overscript[x, "¨"] is bad as well. They work, yes; but not for publication. Cheers!
    $endgroup$
    – Roman
    yesterday












  • $begingroup$
    @Roman Why not just literally use the German character set for that? The double dot over a symbol has e.g. the meaning of a second time derivative in Physics -- which is typeset properly.
    $endgroup$
    – Kagaratsch
    yesterday












  • $begingroup$
    For Umlaut characters you only get äëïöüÿ from the font set but not the others. That wasn't my point though. All I'm saying is that the size of the dots and their distance must be appropriate for the chosen font, otherwise it looks very bad for a native speaker of German, Turkish, Swedish, French, etc. If you don't care about the aesthetics, then all the given solutions work, sure.
    $endgroup$
    – Roman
    yesterday
















6












$begingroup$


I wanted to make a notation with a double dot over a symbol in Mathematica. Searching online or in the documentation did not yield any results. However, just randomly attempting to give a second parameter to the OverDot function surprisingly did exactly what I needed:



enter image description here



I assume the red font suggests that Mathematica perceives this as a syntax mistake at some level, even though the output is as desired. Unfortunately, this does not work for three dots and more.




Is there a proper way to do this without red font appearing?







formatting







share|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    {Overscript[x, ".."], Overscript[x, "..."], Overscript[x, "[Ellipsis]"]}
    $endgroup$
    – Bob Hanlon
    2 days ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    The code editor and documentation are not always completely in sync with the actual typesetting. This is only one of several examples. Ignore the code coloring.
    $endgroup$
    – m_goldberg
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    @BobHanlon as a German speaker I perceive your Overscript[x, ".."] Umlaut to be very improperly typeset. Overscript[x, "¨"] is bad as well. They work, yes; but not for publication. Cheers!
    $endgroup$
    – Roman
    yesterday












  • $begingroup$
    @Roman Why not just literally use the German character set for that? The double dot over a symbol has e.g. the meaning of a second time derivative in Physics -- which is typeset properly.
    $endgroup$
    – Kagaratsch
    yesterday












  • $begingroup$
    For Umlaut characters you only get äëïöüÿ from the font set but not the others. That wasn't my point though. All I'm saying is that the size of the dots and their distance must be appropriate for the chosen font, otherwise it looks very bad for a native speaker of German, Turkish, Swedish, French, etc. If you don't care about the aesthetics, then all the given solutions work, sure.
    $endgroup$
    – Roman
    yesterday














6












6








6





$begingroup$


I wanted to make a notation with a double dot over a symbol in Mathematica. Searching online or in the documentation did not yield any results. However, just randomly attempting to give a second parameter to the OverDot function surprisingly did exactly what I needed:



enter image description here



I assume the red font suggests that Mathematica perceives this as a syntax mistake at some level, even though the output is as desired. Unfortunately, this does not work for three dots and more.




Is there a proper way to do this without red font appearing?







formatting







share|improve this question









$endgroup$




I wanted to make a notation with a double dot over a symbol in Mathematica. Searching online or in the documentation did not yield any results. However, just randomly attempting to give a second parameter to the OverDot function surprisingly did exactly what I needed:



enter image description here



I assume the red font suggests that Mathematica perceives this as a syntax mistake at some level, even though the output is as desired. Unfortunately, this does not work for three dots and more.




Is there a proper way to do this without red font appearing?







formatting




formatting






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 2 days ago









KagaratschKagaratsch

4,83831348




4,83831348








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    {Overscript[x, ".."], Overscript[x, "..."], Overscript[x, "[Ellipsis]"]}
    $endgroup$
    – Bob Hanlon
    2 days ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    The code editor and documentation are not always completely in sync with the actual typesetting. This is only one of several examples. Ignore the code coloring.
    $endgroup$
    – m_goldberg
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    @BobHanlon as a German speaker I perceive your Overscript[x, ".."] Umlaut to be very improperly typeset. Overscript[x, "¨"] is bad as well. They work, yes; but not for publication. Cheers!
    $endgroup$
    – Roman
    yesterday












  • $begingroup$
    @Roman Why not just literally use the German character set for that? The double dot over a symbol has e.g. the meaning of a second time derivative in Physics -- which is typeset properly.
    $endgroup$
    – Kagaratsch
    yesterday












  • $begingroup$
    For Umlaut characters you only get äëïöüÿ from the font set but not the others. That wasn't my point though. All I'm saying is that the size of the dots and their distance must be appropriate for the chosen font, otherwise it looks very bad for a native speaker of German, Turkish, Swedish, French, etc. If you don't care about the aesthetics, then all the given solutions work, sure.
    $endgroup$
    – Roman
    yesterday














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    {Overscript[x, ".."], Overscript[x, "..."], Overscript[x, "[Ellipsis]"]}
    $endgroup$
    – Bob Hanlon
    2 days ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    The code editor and documentation are not always completely in sync with the actual typesetting. This is only one of several examples. Ignore the code coloring.
    $endgroup$
    – m_goldberg
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    @BobHanlon as a German speaker I perceive your Overscript[x, ".."] Umlaut to be very improperly typeset. Overscript[x, "¨"] is bad as well. They work, yes; but not for publication. Cheers!
    $endgroup$
    – Roman
    yesterday












  • $begingroup$
    @Roman Why not just literally use the German character set for that? The double dot over a symbol has e.g. the meaning of a second time derivative in Physics -- which is typeset properly.
    $endgroup$
    – Kagaratsch
    yesterday












  • $begingroup$
    For Umlaut characters you only get äëïöüÿ from the font set but not the others. That wasn't my point though. All I'm saying is that the size of the dots and their distance must be appropriate for the chosen font, otherwise it looks very bad for a native speaker of German, Turkish, Swedish, French, etc. If you don't care about the aesthetics, then all the given solutions work, sure.
    $endgroup$
    – Roman
    yesterday








1




1




$begingroup$
{Overscript[x, ".."], Overscript[x, "..."], Overscript[x, "[Ellipsis]"]}
$endgroup$
– Bob Hanlon
2 days ago




$begingroup$
{Overscript[x, ".."], Overscript[x, "..."], Overscript[x, "[Ellipsis]"]}
$endgroup$
– Bob Hanlon
2 days ago




3




3




$begingroup$
The code editor and documentation are not always completely in sync with the actual typesetting. This is only one of several examples. Ignore the code coloring.
$endgroup$
– m_goldberg
2 days ago




$begingroup$
The code editor and documentation are not always completely in sync with the actual typesetting. This is only one of several examples. Ignore the code coloring.
$endgroup$
– m_goldberg
2 days ago












$begingroup$
@BobHanlon as a German speaker I perceive your Overscript[x, ".."] Umlaut to be very improperly typeset. Overscript[x, "¨"] is bad as well. They work, yes; but not for publication. Cheers!
$endgroup$
– Roman
yesterday






$begingroup$
@BobHanlon as a German speaker I perceive your Overscript[x, ".."] Umlaut to be very improperly typeset. Overscript[x, "¨"] is bad as well. They work, yes; but not for publication. Cheers!
$endgroup$
– Roman
yesterday














$begingroup$
@Roman Why not just literally use the German character set for that? The double dot over a symbol has e.g. the meaning of a second time derivative in Physics -- which is typeset properly.
$endgroup$
– Kagaratsch
yesterday






$begingroup$
@Roman Why not just literally use the German character set for that? The double dot over a symbol has e.g. the meaning of a second time derivative in Physics -- which is typeset properly.
$endgroup$
– Kagaratsch
yesterday














$begingroup$
For Umlaut characters you only get äëïöüÿ from the font set but not the others. That wasn't my point though. All I'm saying is that the size of the dots and their distance must be appropriate for the chosen font, otherwise it looks very bad for a native speaker of German, Turkish, Swedish, French, etc. If you don't care about the aesthetics, then all the given solutions work, sure.
$endgroup$
– Roman
yesterday




$begingroup$
For Umlaut characters you only get äëïöüÿ from the font set but not the others. That wasn't my point though. All I'm saying is that the size of the dots and their distance must be appropriate for the chosen font, otherwise it looks very bad for a native speaker of German, Turkish, Swedish, French, etc. If you don't care about the aesthetics, then all the given solutions work, sure.
$endgroup$
– Roman
yesterday










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















13












$begingroup$

Use ToBoxes to find the boxes generated for OverDot[x, 2]:



OverDot[x,2] //ToBoxes



OverscriptBox["x", "¨"]




You can reproduce these boxes using Overscript:



Overscript[x, RawBoxes @ "¨"]



enter image description here




You can use the same approach for triple dots:



Overscript[x, RawBoxes @ "[TripleDot]"]



enter image description here




For more dots, you will have to use a different mechanism to generate the dots, e.g.:



Overscript[x, Style[Row[{".",".",".","."}],FontTracking->"Condensed"]]



enter image description here




Update



You could also overload OverDot to work with the 3 and higher versions (I also included @Michael's syntax information fix):



SyntaxInformation[OverDot] = {"ArgumentsPattern" -> {_, _.}};

MakeBoxes[OverDot[a_, n_Integer?(GreaterThan[2])], StandardForm] := If[n==3,

    OverscriptBox[MakeBoxes[a], "[TripleDot]"],

    OverscriptBox[

        MakeBoxes[a],

        ToBoxes @ Style[Row[ConstantArray[".", n]], FontTracking->"Condensed"]

    ]

]


Then:



enter image description here






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$





















    8












    $begingroup$

    You could fix the syntax highlighting, or ignore it. Here's a fix:



    SyntaxInformation[OverDot] = {"ArgumentsPattern" -> {_, _.}};


    Mathematica graphics






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$





















      3












      $begingroup$

      Go to the Basic math assistant palette and click on the template.



      enter image description here






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$













      • $begingroup$
        There indeed is a [DoubleDot] template, but it actually leads to an expression with the FullForm OverDot[X,2]! So the syntax is in fact intended, then I'm confused why Mathematica marks it in red font when typed in directly?
        $endgroup$
        – Kagaratsch
        2 days ago








      • 1




        $begingroup$
        Yes... confusing. The documentation for OverDot shows only one argument... so the $2$ is somehow treated extraneously. (Perhaps a bug report is in order.)
        $endgroup$
        – David G. Stork
        2 days ago












      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "387"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f194850%2ftypesetting-a-double-over-dot-on-top-of-a-symbol%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes








      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      13












      $begingroup$

      Use ToBoxes to find the boxes generated for OverDot[x, 2]:



      OverDot[x,2] //ToBoxes



      OverscriptBox["x", "¨"]




      You can reproduce these boxes using Overscript:



      Overscript[x, RawBoxes @ "¨"]



      enter image description here




      You can use the same approach for triple dots:



      Overscript[x, RawBoxes @ "[TripleDot]"]



      enter image description here




      For more dots, you will have to use a different mechanism to generate the dots, e.g.:



      Overscript[x, Style[Row[{".",".",".","."}],FontTracking->"Condensed"]]



      enter image description here




      Update



      You could also overload OverDot to work with the 3 and higher versions (I also included @Michael's syntax information fix):



      SyntaxInformation[OverDot] = {"ArgumentsPattern" -> {_, _.}};
      
MakeBoxes[OverDot[a_, n_Integer?(GreaterThan[2])], StandardForm] := If[n==3,
      
    OverscriptBox[MakeBoxes[a], "[TripleDot]"],
      
    OverscriptBox[
      
        MakeBoxes[a],
      
        ToBoxes @ Style[Row[ConstantArray[".", n]], FontTracking->"Condensed"]
      
    ]
      
]


      Then:



      enter image description here






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$


















        13












        $begingroup$

        Use ToBoxes to find the boxes generated for OverDot[x, 2]:



        OverDot[x,2] //ToBoxes



        OverscriptBox["x", "¨"]




        You can reproduce these boxes using Overscript:



        Overscript[x, RawBoxes @ "¨"]



        enter image description here




        You can use the same approach for triple dots:



        Overscript[x, RawBoxes @ "[TripleDot]"]



        enter image description here




        For more dots, you will have to use a different mechanism to generate the dots, e.g.:



        Overscript[x, Style[Row[{".",".",".","."}],FontTracking->"Condensed"]]



        enter image description here




        Update



        You could also overload OverDot to work with the 3 and higher versions (I also included @Michael's syntax information fix):



        SyntaxInformation[OverDot] = {"ArgumentsPattern" -> {_, _.}};
        
MakeBoxes[OverDot[a_, n_Integer?(GreaterThan[2])], StandardForm] := If[n==3,
        
    OverscriptBox[MakeBoxes[a], "[TripleDot]"],
        
    OverscriptBox[
        
        MakeBoxes[a],
        
        ToBoxes @ Style[Row[ConstantArray[".", n]], FontTracking->"Condensed"]
        
    ]
        
]


        Then:



        enter image description here






        share|improve this answer











        $endgroup$
















          13












          13








          13





          $begingroup$

          Use ToBoxes to find the boxes generated for OverDot[x, 2]:



          OverDot[x,2] //ToBoxes



          OverscriptBox["x", "¨"]




          You can reproduce these boxes using Overscript:



          Overscript[x, RawBoxes @ "¨"]



          enter image description here




          You can use the same approach for triple dots:



          Overscript[x, RawBoxes @ "[TripleDot]"]



          enter image description here




          For more dots, you will have to use a different mechanism to generate the dots, e.g.:



          Overscript[x, Style[Row[{".",".",".","."}],FontTracking->"Condensed"]]



          enter image description here




          Update



          You could also overload OverDot to work with the 3 and higher versions (I also included @Michael's syntax information fix):



          SyntaxInformation[OverDot] = {"ArgumentsPattern" -> {_, _.}};
          
MakeBoxes[OverDot[a_, n_Integer?(GreaterThan[2])], StandardForm] := If[n==3,
          
    OverscriptBox[MakeBoxes[a], "[TripleDot]"],
          
    OverscriptBox[
          
        MakeBoxes[a],
          
        ToBoxes @ Style[Row[ConstantArray[".", n]], FontTracking->"Condensed"]
          
    ]
          
]


          Then:



          enter image description here






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Use ToBoxes to find the boxes generated for OverDot[x, 2]:



          OverDot[x,2] //ToBoxes



          OverscriptBox["x", "¨"]




          You can reproduce these boxes using Overscript:



          Overscript[x, RawBoxes @ "¨"]



          enter image description here




          You can use the same approach for triple dots:



          Overscript[x, RawBoxes @ "[TripleDot]"]



          enter image description here




          For more dots, you will have to use a different mechanism to generate the dots, e.g.:



          Overscript[x, Style[Row[{".",".",".","."}],FontTracking->"Condensed"]]



          enter image description here




          Update



          You could also overload OverDot to work with the 3 and higher versions (I also included @Michael's syntax information fix):



          SyntaxInformation[OverDot] = {"ArgumentsPattern" -> {_, _.}};
          
MakeBoxes[OverDot[a_, n_Integer?(GreaterThan[2])], StandardForm] := If[n==3,
          
    OverscriptBox[MakeBoxes[a], "[TripleDot]"],
          
    OverscriptBox[
          
        MakeBoxes[a],
          
        ToBoxes @ Style[Row[ConstantArray[".", n]], FontTracking->"Condensed"]
          
    ]
          
]


          Then:



          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited yesterday

























          answered 2 days ago









          Carl WollCarl Woll

          73.3k398191




          73.3k398191























              8












              $begingroup$

              You could fix the syntax highlighting, or ignore it. Here's a fix:



              SyntaxInformation[OverDot] = {"ArgumentsPattern" -> {_, _.}};


              Mathematica graphics






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                8












                $begingroup$

                You could fix the syntax highlighting, or ignore it. Here's a fix:



                SyntaxInformation[OverDot] = {"ArgumentsPattern" -> {_, _.}};


                Mathematica graphics






                share|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  8












                  8








                  8





                  $begingroup$

                  You could fix the syntax highlighting, or ignore it. Here's a fix:



                  SyntaxInformation[OverDot] = {"ArgumentsPattern" -> {_, _.}};


                  Mathematica graphics






                  share|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  You could fix the syntax highlighting, or ignore it. Here's a fix:



                  SyntaxInformation[OverDot] = {"ArgumentsPattern" -> {_, _.}};


                  Mathematica graphics







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 2 days ago









                  Michael E2Michael E2

                  150k12203482




                  150k12203482























                      3












                      $begingroup$

                      Go to the Basic math assistant palette and click on the template.



                      enter image description here






                      share|improve this answer











                      $endgroup$













                      • $begingroup$
                        There indeed is a [DoubleDot] template, but it actually leads to an expression with the FullForm OverDot[X,2]! So the syntax is in fact intended, then I'm confused why Mathematica marks it in red font when typed in directly?
                        $endgroup$
                        – Kagaratsch
                        2 days ago








                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        Yes... confusing. The documentation for OverDot shows only one argument... so the $2$ is somehow treated extraneously. (Perhaps a bug report is in order.)
                        $endgroup$
                        – David G. Stork
                        2 days ago
















                      3












                      $begingroup$

                      Go to the Basic math assistant palette and click on the template.



                      enter image description here






                      share|improve this answer











                      $endgroup$













                      • $begingroup$
                        There indeed is a [DoubleDot] template, but it actually leads to an expression with the FullForm OverDot[X,2]! So the syntax is in fact intended, then I'm confused why Mathematica marks it in red font when typed in directly?
                        $endgroup$
                        – Kagaratsch
                        2 days ago








                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        Yes... confusing. The documentation for OverDot shows only one argument... so the $2$ is somehow treated extraneously. (Perhaps a bug report is in order.)
                        $endgroup$
                        – David G. Stork
                        2 days ago














                      3












                      3








                      3





                      $begingroup$

                      Go to the Basic math assistant palette and click on the template.



                      enter image description here






                      share|improve this answer











                      $endgroup$



                      Go to the Basic math assistant palette and click on the template.



                      enter image description here







                      share|improve this answer














                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer








                      edited 2 days ago

























                      answered 2 days ago









                      David G. StorkDavid G. Stork

                      24.9k22155




                      24.9k22155












                      • $begingroup$
                        There indeed is a [DoubleDot] template, but it actually leads to an expression with the FullForm OverDot[X,2]! So the syntax is in fact intended, then I'm confused why Mathematica marks it in red font when typed in directly?
                        $endgroup$
                        – Kagaratsch
                        2 days ago








                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        Yes... confusing. The documentation for OverDot shows only one argument... so the $2$ is somehow treated extraneously. (Perhaps a bug report is in order.)
                        $endgroup$
                        – David G. Stork
                        2 days ago


















                      • $begingroup$
                        There indeed is a [DoubleDot] template, but it actually leads to an expression with the FullForm OverDot[X,2]! So the syntax is in fact intended, then I'm confused why Mathematica marks it in red font when typed in directly?
                        $endgroup$
                        – Kagaratsch
                        2 days ago








                      • 1




                        $begingroup$
                        Yes... confusing. The documentation for OverDot shows only one argument... so the $2$ is somehow treated extraneously. (Perhaps a bug report is in order.)
                        $endgroup$
                        – David G. Stork
                        2 days ago
















                      $begingroup$
                      There indeed is a [DoubleDot] template, but it actually leads to an expression with the FullForm OverDot[X,2]! So the syntax is in fact intended, then I'm confused why Mathematica marks it in red font when typed in directly?
                      $endgroup$
                      – Kagaratsch
                      2 days ago






                      $begingroup$
                      There indeed is a [DoubleDot] template, but it actually leads to an expression with the FullForm OverDot[X,2]! So the syntax is in fact intended, then I'm confused why Mathematica marks it in red font when typed in directly?
                      $endgroup$
                      – Kagaratsch
                      2 days ago






                      1




                      1




                      $begingroup$
                      Yes... confusing. The documentation for OverDot shows only one argument... so the $2$ is somehow treated extraneously. (Perhaps a bug report is in order.)
                      $endgroup$
                      – David G. Stork
                      2 days ago




                      $begingroup$
                      Yes... confusing. The documentation for OverDot shows only one argument... so the $2$ is somehow treated extraneously. (Perhaps a bug report is in order.)
                      $endgroup$
                      – David G. Stork
                      2 days ago


















                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematica Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid …



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f194850%2ftypesetting-a-double-over-dot-on-top-of-a-symbol%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      -

                      Popular posts from this blog

                      What other Star Trek series did the main TNG cast show up in?

                      Image
                      .everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0; } 4 I'm referring to Picard, Riker, Data, Worf, Geordi, Dr. Crusher, Wesley Crusher, Chief O'Brien and family, Deanna Troi, Guinan. I know Picard and Worf show up on DS9, though I haven't seen it myself. I'm curious what happened to the characters after that last episode of TNG? star-trek star-trek-tng share | improve this question edited 10 hours ago Ham Sandwich 6,051 2 25 75
                      Read more

                      Berlina muro

                      Image
                      La berlina muro ĉe Bethaniendamm, 1986 La berlina muro aŭ simple la muro [1] , nomita ankaŭ "kontraŭfaŝisma remparo" en propaganda lingvo de la iama Germana Demokratia Respubliko, estis parto de la interngermana limo, kiu dividis de la 13-a de aŭgusto 1961 ĝis la 9-a de novembro 1989 okcidentan Berlinon de la orienta parto de la urbo kaj de la ĉirkaŭa tereno de la GDR. Ĝi estis unu el la plej famaj simboloj de la malvarma milito kaj de la disdivido de Germanio. Pli ol simpla muro, la berlina muro estis fakte tuta defendokonstruaĵo kun du muroj, ena malplena strio, rondirvojo, gardturoj kaj alarmsistemoj. Dum la provo transiri la severe garditan limon al okcidenta Berlino multaj homoj estis mortigitaj. La preciza nombro de viktimoj estas pridisputita kaj ne certa; la nombroj anoncataj varias inter 86 kaj 238 mortintoj. La malplifortiĝo de Sovetunio kaj la politiko de liberigo gvidita de Miĥail Gorbaĉov ebligis al la orientgermanoj faligi la 9-an de novembro 1989 l
                      Read more

                      Berlina aerponto

                      Image
                      Flugkoridoroj dum la blokado de Berlino La Berlina aerponto estas la provizigo de okcidenta Berlino per aviadiloj fare de la aliancanoj inter la 23-a de junio 1948 kaj la 12-a de majo 1949 dum la blokado de Berlino fare de la sovetia armeo. Enhavo 1 Historio 1.1 La aerkoridoroj 1.2 Unuaj flugoj 1.3 Plibonigo de la aerponto 1.4 Fino de la aerponto 1.5 Rozinbombiloj 1.6 Bilanco 2 Flughavenoj 2.1 Berlino 2.2 Okcidenta Germanio 3 Aviadiloj de la berlina aerponto 4 15-a datreveno de la aerponto 5 Bibliografio 6 Referencoj 7 Eksteraj ligiloj Historio | General Lucius D. Clay, militguberniestro de la usona okupadzono Jam antaŭ la berlina aerponto estiĝis la malgranda aerponto . La estro de la sovetia militadministracio en Germanio, Vasili Daniloviĉ Sokolovski, ordonis la 1-an de aprilo 1948, kiel reago al la konferenco de Londono inter britoj, francoj kaj reprezentantoj de Benelukso pri aligo de Germa
                      Read more