Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tomruen (talk | contribs) at 23:48, 24 January 2015 (→cube truncations). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

Barnstars+ May 2004-Dec 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Invitation

	You've been invited to be part of WikiProject Cosmology
	Hello. Your contributions to Misplaced Pages 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 Talk page for more information! Cheers Tetra quark (talk) 19:56, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Nets for Geodestic spheres

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)

Hi Jooe15, Thanks! Most I didn't do but I have software to make nets. This Free webpage generates polyhedra, and OBJ export. And not-free Stella (software) can draw nets of imported polyhedra. Which one are you interested in. Conway polyhedron notation is given on many at Goldberg polyhedron and Capsid. Tom Ruen (talk) 03:02, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Johnson

Tom, you are plastering references to Johnson, Geometries and transformations (2015) across Misplaced Pages 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)

Um. I have asked the question at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mathematics#Citing_a_preprint. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:20, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Cosmology - task

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)

WikiProject Chemicals

Ah, thanks. I've tried to weed out whatever I can - I've removed a lot from the list as I've gone along - but things do slip through. Thanks for the heads-up. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 08:41, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

cube truncations

It works with cantellation too!  ;-) 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)