Pens for mathematics

[dcjacobson]

If you want to go vintage, I suggest I Sheaffer Snorkel with an xf or accountant's nib.

 

Don

[mathmarc]

If you want to go vintage, I suggest I Sheaffer Snorkel with an xf or accountant's nib.

 

Don

 

Thanks for all the wonderful replies. However, I am more interested

in a non-fine point, for when I am writing letters, etc.

 

 

 

[Randal6393]

If you would like to experiment with an italic nib, I would recommend a Sheaffer Viewpoint Fine Italic or Manuscript Medium Italic. Both are quite inexpensive and will give you a good idea if you are really meant to use italic pens. Another inexepensive, quick solution is to order a 1.1mm italic nib from Lamy for your Vista. The old nib slips off and on goes a new one.

 

Beautiful work. Using a fountain pen definitely adds an extra dimension to your math work. Is that good?

[mathmarc]

Beautiful work. Using a fountain pen definitely adds an extra dimension to your math work. Is that good?

 

:roflmho:

 

It makes some problems easier others harder... ;-)

 

 

 

 

[chkuo]

Very nice review!

 

It's funny that you mentioned about grading. I caught students changing the grade when I use BP to grade the exams (my terrible handwriting is too hard to imitate I guess. LOL). That never happen again after I switched to a FP with a semi-flex nib, plus the Waterman Red really stands out.

 

[dfatouros]

Hello colleagues!

 

When I was in college, I used a Cross Century F for 4 years of BSc maths and an MSc. When I lost that it was a Cross Townsend F for the PhD. Now when I write equations/algebra my favorite is a M200 with a binderised stub 0.7 . I think that to get the proper equation look (think TeX) you cannot beat an italics nib - when equations are typeset almost all letters (or at least the variables and functions) are italics.

 

I agree with the poster that talked about the 1.1 italic nob for the safaris. It is excellent (though aliitle too broad for normal text for me and marginally broad for equations).

 

I recently moved in my organisation to a technical department with a hiogh percentage of maths/physics graduates. The proportion of FP users is certainly higher here, though my boss (a fellow mathematician and FP writer) told me he cannot write maths with his fountain pen! Maybe he needs an italic nib!

[cyborg009]

The Namiki Falcon in F is definitely one of the best choices for editing. It makes a terrificly precise line. I use regular pilot red, and it is great.

[the hobbit]

I'm sitting here doing practice proofs with my new XF Lamy 2000.

 

:roflmho:

[Goshzilla]

I used a Rotring Core fine nib pen for about two years, then went to Rotring 600 XF, both pens suit my mathematics writing very well. You are right about the Lamy Safari, I was very disappointed in their XF nib because it wrote too broad.

[thibaulthalpern]

Very interesting post. You're basically looking for very fine nibbed pens along with inks that dry fast. That's my basic requirement too though I'm not in computational mathematics but am in anthropology. However, my discipline has nothing to do with my requirements. In any case, have you tried the Pilot 78G? I sees to have a finer line than the scan of your Falcon.

[thibaulthalpern]

<snip> it was a joy to use ... except I hate having to cross out or start all over again for each mistake.

 

 

To paraphrase one of my professors. "I always use a pen. It forces me to think very hard before I write anything down."

He tended to use an old school MB and wrote big to compensate for the lack of fine-ness in the nib.

 

I don't know about math, but in many other disciplines in the humanities and social sciences, the very reason your professor gives is the very reason for writer's block. I'm in cultural anthropology which crosses humanities and social sciences (and even crosses fine arts and mathematics depending on your research--e.g., mathematical anthropology) and we have to UNLEARN that writing is the endpoint of our thought process. In fact, writing IS part of our thought process. If we only think in our heads we very quickly get into a muddle.

 

Writing is a process and can be used as a tool to help us think. Often times when we sit in front of a computer and type we may think we need to get the first thoughts out perfect and so we end up staring at a blank screen for hours unable to get our thoughts out. That leads to writer's block and many a graduate student can tell you that it's happened to them. It's happened to me.

 

Writing a'int sacred. I write to process, get the thoughts out, and get them going and interacting. It a'int final until it's published in a book or journal. But even then, there is this wise advice I received from my advisor who received it from his mentor: "Publish now, retract later." The idea of the advice is if you continue being afraid of saying anything and publishing anything (maybe because you think you're not sure of what you're saying, or something may change, etc.) you'll never get anything published. Published things themselves can be retracted too in subsequent publications by saying something like, "Oops. I don't believe in my analysis now and here's why. And here's a better way to look at it."

 

Writing a'int sacred. :-)

Edited September 6, 2008 by thibaulthalpern

[modular]

Nothing constructive here, but from a fellow student looking to attend graduate school in the future , was nice to discover this thread! I imagine that when I'm at the stage of research I'll only grow crazier than I am now. =)

 

I have always wanted to try a Namiki...I wonder!

 

I use a Lamy 2000 XF for my physics/maths work. It's not very XF but I prefer a bolder line and I write bigger that way which means my hand doesn't cramp up as much. I also use a Safari/Al-Star F or XF for my knockabout pen. I tried using a Pilot F in the past, but it was too spidery for my liking.

 

[mathmarc]

<snip> it was a joy to use ... except I hate having to cross out or start all over again for each mistake.

 

 

To paraphrase one of my professors. "I always use a pen. It forces me to think very hard before I write anything down."

He tended to use an old school MB and wrote big to compensate for the lack of fine-ness in the nib.

 

I don't know about math, but in many other disciplines in the humanities and social sciences, the very reason your professor gives is the very reason for writer's block.

 

<snip>

 

Writing a'int sacred. I write to process, get the thoughts out, and get them going and interacting. It a'int final until it's published in a book or journal. But even then, there is this wise advice I received from my advisor who received it from his mentor: "Publish now, retract later." The idea of the advice is if you continue being afraid of saying anything and publishing anything (maybe because you think you're not sure of what you're saying, or something may change, etc.) you'll never get anything published. Published things themselves can be retracted too in subsequent publications by saying something like, "Oops. I don't believe in my analysis now and here's why. And here's a better way to look at it."

 

Writing a'int sacred. :-)

 

I think there is a difference between your area and math. In math there is no "belief" (in proofs at least). It is true; it is not true, or it

is not provable given our current set of axioms. I am not saying I never use scratch paper, but one of the biggest mistakes beginning

students make is just writing solutions without thought (this goes for calculus to more advanced topics). The key to writing a good proof

is first find intuition to the problem. Next, design a road map with some land marks along the way. Finally, Methodically progress

through each portion of the proof (in any order you deem most efficient) until the proof is complete. Once everything is done and verified, publish... There is no

room for a mistake here. If one line is not justifiable, then the proof is not correct. So in this case, writing is very sacred, as nothing is true

until written down and proven. In fact, a mathematicians career can be ruined by publishing and later retracting a proof with a mistake,

so it is critical to insure that everything written down is correct.

 

As for the 78G, I tried it and did not like it very much. I am going to play around with a VP in the near future though and report back.

Edited September 8, 2008 by mathmarc

[Goshzilla]

<snip> it was a joy to use ... except I hate having to cross out or start all over again for each mistake.

 

 

To paraphrase one of my professors. "I always use a pen. It forces me to think very hard before I write anything down."

He tended to use an old school MB and wrote big to compensate for the lack of fine-ness in the nib.

 

I don't know about math, but in many other disciplines in the humanities and social sciences, the very reason your professor gives is the very reason for writer's block.

 

<snip>

 

Writing a'int sacred. I write to process, get the thoughts out, and get them going and interacting. It a'int final until it's published in a book or journal. But even then, there is this wise advice I received from my advisor who received it from his mentor: "Publish now, retract later." The idea of the advice is if you continue being afraid of saying anything and publishing anything (maybe because you think you're not sure of what you're saying, or something may change, etc.) you'll never get anything published. Published things themselves can be retracted too in subsequent publications by saying something like, "Oops. I don't believe in my analysis now and here's why. And here's a better way to look at it."

 

Writing a'int sacred. :-)

 

I think there is a difference between your area and math. In math there is no "belief" (in proofs at least). It is true; it is not true, or it

is not provable given our current set of axioms. I am not saying I never use scratch paper, but one of the biggest mistakes beginning

students make is just writing solutions without thought (this goes for calculus to more advanced topics). The key to writing a good proof

is first find intuition to the problem. Next, design a road map with some land marks along the way. Finally, Methodically progress

through each portion of the proof (in any order you deem most efficient) until the proof is complete. Once everything is done and verified, publish... There is no

room for a mistake here. If one line is not justifiable, then the proof is not correct. So in this case, writing is very sacred, as nothing is true

until written down and proven. In fact, a mathematicians career can be ruined by publishing and later retracting a proof with a mistake,

so it is critical to insure that everything written down is correct.

 

As for the 78G, I tried it and did not like it very much. I am going to play around with a VP in the near future though and report back.

 

That's pretty much the essence of mathematical proofs. I only did it as an undergrad, I don't have plans to become a career mathematician, that's a field I could never do competitively and enjoy at the same time, I only enjoyed math casually reading text books and then writing proofs for the exercises, but of course there is always new unanswered questions along the way, I've found a few during that time.

[mturk]

I have used a Pelikan M800 with Richard Binder XXF nib, but now I use a 1945 Parker 51 "Wedding Band" w/factory XF nib. The Pel was nice and light, but it required frequent recaps to prevent drying out. Waterman black seems to work fine for calculations.

[katfisch]

I'd heartily agree with Mathmarc... the Namiki Falcon SF nib, upside down, is micrographic.

[mathmarc]

Dear all.

I thought I would provide an update in my pens for math thread. Basically, the main difference is the addition of a Vanishing Point with Fine nib to replace the Lamy. This pen brings muchconvenience to meetings, quick notes and is perfect for annotating papers (printed oncheap printer paper) . Also, it is quite handy when I am combining thinking and writing, asit is so easy to retract the nib. As for the ink I use,I find that Visconti Blue works the best given how I use the pen. I still use the Emoticaand Falcon every day, although I find myself using MB Racing Green in the Falcon mostly.Still, my setup remains quite stable and although there are many other pens I want, (Pel M800with Binder .6mm stub italic!); there are none I actually need. (FYI: The Lamy is now utilized exclusively with red ink for grading and editing papers).

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_jZoICSbxiRw/SXzx1qAMN-I/AAAAAAAAAFg/Zdifss3355g/s144/IMG_0274.JPG

From VP

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_jZoICSbxiRw/SXzx14XAOnI/AAAAAAAAAFo/IKjVA_u0h2o/s144/IMG_0276.JPG

From VP

Keep on writing!

mm

Edited January 25, 2009 by mathmarc

[yachtsilverswan]

Dear all.

 

 

I thought I would provide an update in my pens for math thread. Basically, the main difference

is the addition of a Vanishing Point with Fine nib...

 

other pens I want, (Pel M800 with Binder .6mm stub italic!)...(FYI: The Lamy is now utilized exclusively with red ink for grading and editing papers).

 

mm

 

Hey Marc - congrats on the Vanishing Point. It's the ideal note taking and the ideal think-write-think-write pen. That retractable one handed operation makes all the difference. No more French nib kissing to restart a dry nib. No more having students and colleagues wonder about the adequacy of your social life while you're sucking face with a fountain pen.

 

I think you'll like the 0.6 mm Stub Italic - I have a couple of Mr. Binder's 0.6 mm Cursive Italics. The Stub Italic is smoother. The Cursive Italic produces more line width variation.

 

And congrats on holding the line on Red Ink for grading papers. Someone has to say enough is enough to the Political Correctness crowd and their Professionally Offended comrades.

 

Have fun - burn some ink.

[mathmarc]

Dear all.

 

 

I thought I would provide an update in my pens for math thread. Basically, the main difference

is the addition of a Vanishing Point with Fine nib...

 

other pens I want, (Pel M800 with Binder .6mm stub italic!)...(FYI: The Lamy is now utilized exclusively with red ink for grading and editing papers).

 

mm

 

Hey Marc - congrats on the Vanishing Point. It's the ideal note taking and the ideal think-write-think-write pen. That retractable one handed operation makes all the difference. No more French nib kissing to restart a dry nib. No more having students and colleagues wonder about the adequacy of your social life while you're sucking face with a fountain pen.

 

And not to mention I just never really liked the taste of ink.

 

I think you'll like the 0.6 mm Stub Italic - I have a couple of Mr. Binder's 0.6 mm Cursive Italics. The Stub Italic is smoother. The Cursive Italic produces more line width variation.

Oh how you tempt me, still, I must be responsible!

 

And congrats on holding the line on Red Ink for grading papers. Someone has to say enough is enough to the Political Correctness crowd and their Professionally Offended comrades.

 

Have fun - burn some ink.

 

 

I used to grade with a giant red magic marker ;-) I actually use red not only to grade student's

work but also to grade my own, so I think it is fair. Making mistakes is part of learning and it is

OK to be wrong. However, attention still needs to be drawn to them, so the student can learn.

Plus, I am color blind, so browns/purples look black to me.

 

[prisonrodeo]

(FYI: The Lamy is now utilized exclusively with red ink for grading and editing papers).

 

Perfect. I find I need a finer point for grading than for other kinds of work -- all that marking in margins and between lines.

 

And yes, it has to be red for that purpose. Blood on the tracks and all that. Skrip red is my personal favorite.