Inserting space after a display math

[crisp lark]

I want to effectively make it look like this

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath,calc}
\begin{document}
\begin{gather*}
  1 + 1 = 2 \\
  2 + 2 = 5
\end{gather*}
\vspace{1ex-\baselineskip}

\noindent Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod

tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim
\end{document}

Here are the things I've tried so far and their issues

1. The above example: Makes a new paragraph, requiring adjusting by -\baselineskip and using \noindent.
2. Not having the empty line: Space is inserted between the two lines of regular text, rather than between the math and the first line.
3. Using \vspace before the \end{gather*}: Does nothing (I think \vspace is ignored in math blocks).
4. Using \\[\dimeval{1ex-\baselineskip}] before the \end{gather*}: Requires adjusting by -\baselineskip, and therefore needs \dimeval because calc doesn't support \\[].
5. Setting \belowdisplayskip: I only want this change to apply to this one display math block, so I would need to reset it afterwards or put it inside a group, which is annoying.
6. Setting \belowdisplayskip inside the gather*: Does nothing.
   I'd appreciate any other ideas on how to do this. Solutions 3 or 6 would be perfect if they worked, or solution 1 if there was a way to tell it to insert the space before the current line (removing the need for -\baselineskip and \noindent). I'm thinking I might just define a macro that expands to \\[\dimeval{#1-\baselineskip}].

side note: is there any way to prevent the bots from responding to a specific message with a TeX code block?

[drowsy prairie]

Is your objective to modify the vskip after all gather* environments only?

[crisp lark]

I only want this change to apply to this one display math block
no, otherwise I would just redefine the gather* environment to set \belowdisplayskip or something like that

[tulip lichen]

Why is it annoying to adjust the value of belowdisplayskip in a group?

[crisp lark]

it requires two additional commands that i'd rather not need.

also i need to set the length above the environment, when i only care about its effect below the environment

[drowsy prairie]

This sounds really like an XY problem

[drowsy prairie]

If this is a one-off thing then why are you bothered by ad-hoc solutions?

[crisp lark]

I want to remove the excess spacing so the qed from the proof environment aligns properly with the math. \qedhere doesn't work with mathtools.

[crisp lark]

it's not quite one-off. i need this for like 10% of proof environments

[drowsy prairie]

Could you give an example where qedhere doesn't work properly?

[crisp lark]

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{mathtools,amsthm}
\mathtoolsset{showonlyrefs,showmanualtags}
\begin{document}
\begin{proof}
  \begin{gather}
    1 + 1 \qedhere
  \end{gather}
\end{proof}
\end{document}

[drowsy prairie]

Obviously \qedhere cannot work with numbered equations

You have to use gather* if you want qedhere

[crisp lark]

yeah but the number isn't there because of showonlyrefs, so that's not a problem

and even if the number was there it could be placed right under it

which is why I want to be able to insert (negative) space after the display math

[drowsy prairie]

If amsthm were that smart, you wouldn't have needed \qedhere to begin with

A hack you can use is \tag*{$\qedsymbol$} on the last line of your display math environment, and then suppress the actual qedsymbol that proof places

[crisp lark]

which is why I want to just insert some negative spacing there

[crisp lark]

supressing is another annoying issue, since you can easily make the symbol empty, but it'll still be placed, taking up vertical space in this case. I can use qedhere somewhere to make it show up, but that's another thing I need to do :/

i wish there was a rewrite of all the usual packages that makes them integrate well together lol

[drowsy prairie]

I am pretty sure ConTeXt can do this

It's much more cohesive and internally consistent than LaTeX

[crisp lark]

huh i'll have to look into it

[drowsy prairie]

But back to your question, I think this is the easiest way to deal with it

You'll have to find some way to suppress the qed

https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/88168/

Seems like \renewcommand*\qed{} should do the trick

[crisp lark]

ooh thanks

still curious on a good way to insert negative space after math mode, but this will be useful

[balmy burrow]

centred inline maths then?

[drowsy prairie]

You can try something like this

,,```tex
<mathtools,amssymb>

\begin{gather*}
xyzzy.
\end{gather*}
\strut \vadjust{
\kern-\dp\strutbox
\vtop to \dp\strutbox{\vss
\hbox to\hsize{\hfil $\square$}
\kern\baselineskip \kern\belowdisplayskip \kern\dp\strutbox
}
}%
\ipsum