Fixing Broken Latex Code

[bartnikm]

Description

Places were latex code did not display correctly were updated to allow the code to display correctly.

Motivation and context

There were some places where code written in latex was formatted or written incorrectly

How has this been tested?

• Testing pipeline.
• Other.

Examples

https://bartnikm.github.io/tardis-bartnikm/branch/latex-names/physics/setup/plasma/helium_nlte.html

Type of change

• Bug fix.
• New feature.
• Breaking change.
• None of the above.

Checklist

• My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • (optional) I have built the documentation on my fork following the instructions.
• I have assigned and requested two reviewers for this pull request.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1891 (42aa8d9) into master (c705946) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head 42aa8d9 differs from pull request most recent head 4758856. Consider uploading reports for the commit 4758856 to get more accurate results

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1891   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   62.55%   62.55%           
=======================================
  Files          68       68           
  Lines        7127     7128    +1     
=======================================
+ Hits         4458     4459    +1     
  Misses       2669     2669           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
tardis/tardis/plasma/properties/atomic.py	61.98% <0.00%> (+0.22%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update c705946...4758856. Read the comment docs.

[tardis-bot]

Before a pull request is accepted, it must meet the following criteria:

• Is the necessary information provided?
• Is this a duplicate PR?
  • If a new PR is clearly a duplicate, ask how this PR is different from the original PR?
  • If this PR is about to be merged, close the original PR with a link to this new PR that solved the issue.
• Does it pass existing tests and are new tests provided if required?
  • The test coverage should not decrease, and for new features should be close to 100%.
• Is the code tidy?
  • No unnecessary print lines or code comments.

[andrewfullard]

What actually changed here? I can't tell from the changelog

[bartnikm]

I did not edit or look at this section, so I'm not sure what, if anything, was changed here either.

[isaacgsmith]

I have found that sometimes github just does that

[wkerzendorf]

normally github does not change things. What does your local diff say?

[bartnikm]

this is potentially a different newline character due to this being edited via Jupyter Notebook on a Windows OS.

[isaacgsmith]

I think we should wait on this one until #1868 has been merged. That way we can rebase and check that this does fix the issue in the plasma graph. But it looks good to me