Hello. Your contributions to Wikipedia have been analyzed carefully and you're among the few chosen to have a first access to a new project. I hope you can contribute to it by expanding the main page and later start editing the articles in its scope. Make sure to check out the
Hi, Im new to wikipedia and just looking around I noticed you have really amazing. I was looking at this page User:Tomruen/Geodestic_sphere and i was wondering if there was a 2d Net somewhere for those shapes. Like someone thing you could theoretically print out on a piece of paper and then fold into those shapes. — also I was wondering what program you were using to make those images.—thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jooe15 (talk • contribs) 02:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Tom, you are plastering references to Johnson, Geometries and transformations (2015) across Wikipedia as fast as you can type. At present I can find no reference at all to this publication elsewhere, not Google, not Amazon, nada, zilch. There are just the old few references to the draft MS he circulated some years ago. What is your basis for all this? If it doesn't appear ASAP, you will have made a handsome mess. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 10:36, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
I have a preprint PDF. It has been accepted for publication last September. Its a limited source for polytopes, but an extremely detailed source for Coxeter groups and subgroups and related terminology. I'll take responsibility if there's some delay for printing. Tom Ruen (talk) 10:39, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
I decided to drop you a message to make sure you check out the first task of the cosmology project:
Help improve the Universe. Please feel free to remove this message after you read it :) Tetra quark (talk
) 03:31, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
cube truncations
It works with cantellation too! [2] ;-) Double sharp (talk) 07:16, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
You could analogically call the phases "cantellation" (rhombicuboctahedron), "complete cantellation" (octahedron), "hypercantellation" (unnamed), "complete hypercantellation" (degenerate, cube with hidden stuff inside), "quasicantellation" (great rhombicuboctahedron), complete quasicantellation (unnamed), and anticantellation (unnamed). Double sharp (talk) 07:20, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
It looks fun. Tom Ruen (talk) 07:48, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
OK, how's this?
Cube cantellations
Cube {4,3}
Cantellation rr{4,3}
Complete cantellation {3,4}
Anticantellation
Hypercantellation
Complete quasicantellation
Quasicantellation rr{4,3/2} rr{4/3,3}
Complete hypercantellation
It would be better with a few more intermediate cases, though. Double sharp (talk) 11:04, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
P.S. I'd love to see this applied to runcinating a tesseract, but by that point it might get visually really confusing. It would be really cool, though! Double sharp (talk) 11:06, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
It looks very nice, but we have no sources besides Bowers who uses his own terminology. Tom Ruen (talk) 11:09, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Wait, so the truncations are actually in Coxeter? That is really cool. Double sharp (talk) 13:14, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
The truncations are real, but we need sources there too for terminology. Quasitruncation comes from Johnson at least. Tom Ruen (talk) 23:48, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Of course they're real. Do you mean Coxeter mentions the entire sequence, but without the names like hyper- and antitruncation? Double sharp (talk) 07:34, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Nope, not to my knowledge. I just made visualizations of what was described on the wikipedia page. So the hyper-,anti- truncated forms, even if vertex-transitive are not mentioned apparently because they can't generate uniform (equal edge-length) solutions. Tom Ruen (talk) 11:11, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Omnisnub tesseract and friends
Hi Tomruen, do you know any way to make pictures for cases like ht0,1,2,3{4,3,3}? Double sharp (talk) 13:45, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
It's mostly easy to generate as alternated coordinates of the omnitruncation (V-E-V walk algorithm marking vertices even/odd sets), and Stella can import 4OFF 4D coordinates (and generate full convex hull). There will be different edge lengths, like this construction File:Snubcubes_in_grCO.svg, but no way to equalize them all. Tom Ruen (talk) 18:34, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Cool. Can you make pictures of the remaining nonuniforms? (ht0,1,2,3{3,3,3}, ht0,1,2,3{4,3,3}, sr3{3,3,4}, ht0,1,2,3{3,4,3}, ht0,1,2,3{5,3,3}, ht0,1,2,3{3,3,2}, ht0,1,2,3{4,3,2}, ht0,1,2,3{5,3,2}.) Or at least give 4OFF files that can be imported to Stella.
(P.S. Even though they're nonuniform, because of their nonuniform cells, these figures are all still isogonal, right? So I would expect their duals to be isochoric as well.) Double sharp (talk) 08:54, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
It's not a priority for me now, but if I dig out my programs sometime. I'd rather get SVG graphs for all the [3,3,5]polychora in all the coxeter planes. (Previously I mainly cheated, made coordinates from sign/position permutations.) And yes isogonal, and duals isochoric. Tom Ruen (talk) 09:05, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Symmetry operations
Hello!
I'm Daria from Russia. I'm very sorry, but I heve some difficaltes with translation into English some terms and wordings conected with chasles theorem, affine motions of plane turn, glide reflection, symmetry,rotational movement... Maybe you know some good webside about that topic? I can't find a good one. Could you help me, please?
My email: [email protected] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.252.74.7 (talk) 21:15, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
A correspondence table for the different systems of naming convex uniform polychora
Looks useful in Stella4D at least. Tom Ruen (talk) 23:54, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
P.s. I wonder why Bowers calls the rectified 24-cell a disicositetrachoron, and the snub 24-cell a snub disicositetrachoron? He also calls the rectified 5-cell a dispentachoron, double the cells of the 5-cell, but the truncations also double the cells. And anyway, I don't see how to get the snub 24-cell from the rectified 24-cell. Tom Ruen (talk) 02:03, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Wait, where does Bowers use disicositetrachoron for the rectified {3,4,3}? On his website he gives rectified icositetrachoron, if I am not mistaken – I suspect because any truncation is going to double the cell count. In the cases where all the cells are congruent (the midpoint of bitruncation) he adds the prefixes and gets tetracontoctachoron.
I suspect that disicositetrachoron got used in the name of the snub 24-cell for convenience, for there it cannot mean anything but the original truncated 24-cell. After all, the snub 24-cell has 24 icosahedra (alternated truncated octahedra), 24 tetrahedra (alternated cubes), and 96 tetrahedra (these are the snub cells, filling in the gaps made from the deleted vertices): hence snub (96) + disicositetrachoron (2×24). That is consistent with the names like
snub disprismatohexacosihecatonicosachoron
.)
I wonder: does Johnson have any name for (nonuniform)? Bowers does not seem to have one. I would expect Johnson to use runcic snub rectified 16-cell. Double sharp (talk) 06:03, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Okay, I see George uses disicositetrachoron (#23=r{3,4,3}). Runcic snub rectified means one node is ringed beyond the snub, sr3{3,4,3}, . In constrast sr{3,3,4} (Same as snub 24-cell!) = is a snub rectified 16-cell but cantisnub 16-cell would be consistent since snub is an alternated truncation, versus alternated cantitruncation. So sr3{3,3,4} could also be a runcic cantisnub 16-cell? Tom Ruen (talk) 06:17, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Oops! I meant to ring the final node, creating s3s3s4x (). Sorry for the mistake, but thanks for the naming suggestions. Does that make a truncic tesseract (= r{4,3,3})? Double sharp (talk) 07:32, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Johnson doesn't name h1. And that's why I write as a half symmetry operation, like [1+,2p]=[p], = , instead of or as an alternation, having no effect on the geometry. It's a half symmetry of the same figure, i.e. . And more generally = , or by symmetry = , [1+,2p,3,3]=[(3,p,3),3]. Tom Ruen (talk) 07:39, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
p.s. Maybe someday we'll say r{1+,4,3,3} for , half symmetry form of r{4,3,3} for ? And you could also say {4,(3,3)*}={}4 = 1/24th symmetry form of tesseract? (Parallel to subgroup symmetry [4,(3,3)*] = []4, subgroup index 24, = ) Tom Ruen (talk) 10:00, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Infinite polygons
Hi Tom,
I am replying to your email here because my email system is currently a mess.
Sorry, I don't have a digital copy. There isn't even one on Branko's web site.
In the paper he identifies three types of regular "infinite polygon":
"Apeirogon", the subdivided straight line
"Zigzag", the plane, er, zigzag
"Helical polygon", a screw shape winding round an infinite prism-ish core.
But it is important to remember that Grünbaum's paper is forty years old, Coxeter's even older, and times have changed since then.
The Generalized polygons of Tits are a rather different beast, more a class of configuration than a real polytope. Best to keep these ideas well separate.
Skew polygons is really just a descriptive term, it has relatively little mathematical significance. The helical apeirogons are skew, but the others described are not.
Tom, can I please ask you to take more care in sticking to
WP:AVOIDABUSE. In such tendentious circumstances as we find ourselves in, it is important to take special care. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk
) 20:12, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Just read your email. My crustiness over the content is one thing, but I do try to remain civil and reasonable. You have gone too far the other way and yes, I do take that personally. You can take my post above as further comment on that. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 20:29, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
I apologize for my imprudent, impatient attempts helpfulness. I misread your reactions as joyful exuberance. Tom Ruen (talk) 21:06, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Accepted. I will remain crusty over proper sourcing and presentation of the content. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 21:29, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. The article has no reliable sources. Please do not re-add material w/o proper citation to reliable independent sources. Ad Orientem (talk
) 19:33, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
The book exists, the author is notable. I don't see the problem. Tom Ruen (talk) 19:36, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Notability is debatable. WP:V and WP:CITE are not. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:44, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
So if I read a book, and write a summary, how does someone verify the accuracy of my summary? Tom Ruen (talk) 20:03, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes, that is exactly correct. See
WP:3RR I am not going to revert this again. However I am requesting that you do so. If you do not, I may have to request intervention from an Admin which I would rather not do. -Ad Orientem (talk
) 20:13, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Please stop adding
Life Is Real Only Then, When 'I Am'. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Ad Orientem (talk
) 20:10, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Please stop removing content without discussion. It is disrespectful to the person who took the time to write up the summary. Tom Ruen (talk) 20:18, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
It has been discussed. The article has no reliable sources which flatly contravenes
WP:ANI. I hope that will not be necessary. -Ad Orientem (talk
) 20:28, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Please take the matter to
WP:ANI or whomever you like. I don't understand what standards you see missing. Tom Ruen (talk
Your right to remove material without discussion seems no greater value than my right to protect it. It takes two to edit war. Tom Ruen (talk) 20:37, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
You can't repeatedly add poorly sourced and unsourced material.
Verifiability is policy. I strongly suggest that you stop readding this content or you will likely be blocked from editing for a while.- MrX