Talk:Regular Polytopes (book)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Mathematics Mid‑priority

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-priority on the project's priority scale.

Polyhedra

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Polyhedra, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of polygons, polyhedra, and other polytopes on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolyhedraWikipedia:WikiProject PolyhedraTemplate:WikiProject PolyhedraPolyhedra articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

fullerenes

Siobhan Roberts' biography quotes Sir Harry Kroto, codiscoverer of fullerenes: "I knew Buckminster Fuller's work, but I didn't know the Coxeter connection. Certainly, Coxeter's book Regular Polytopes would have been helpful." If there's anything in Regular Polytopes about the truncated icosahedron, let alone the higher Goldberg polyhedra, I can't find it! —Tamfang 01:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reads like an advertisement

It praises the book too much. Not enough citations for all the circlejerking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.116.47 (talk) 15:48, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

the illo

The stereographic {5,3,3} from Jenn3d is not the most appropriate choice. This is a representation of a curved object, a tiling of S3 (positively-curved 3-space); Regular Polytopes is about objects with flat boundaries in flat 4-space. While conflating the two is a convenient way to visualize the convex 4-polytopes, I think Coxeter would object. Better a flat projection. —Tamfang 05:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the image and tweaked the caption. Actually, both images are projections of the 120-cell into 3-space, so the underlying object is the same - the difference is that one projection preserves angles, the other preserves straight lines. Gandalf61 08:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good change. Maybe a lores photographed book cover would be nice too? (I have a paperback copy at least). Tom Ruen 16:26, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found my mislaid new copy! —Tamfang 18:11, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Jenn figure can be seen as the result of two projections – a gnomonic projection from E4 to the S3, followed by a stereographic projection from S3 to E3 – but what angles does it preserve? The angle between edges is 108° (the pentagonal angle) in the polychoron, 109.5° (the tetrahedral angle) in the projection; the angle between faces is 116.6° in the polychoron, 120° in the projection; the angle between cells is 144° in the polychoron, 180° in the projection. (Naturally I'm getting some of these figures from Coxeter's table!) —Tamfang 06:16, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tamfang, that must be a rhetorical question, as you seem to know the answer already. If you don't like the new illustration then find your own. I tried to help out, and you just produce more complaints. I can't read your mind to work out what you want here, so I am done. Gandalf61 10:07, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did I say I'm unhappy with the new picture?? Au contraire! I'm asking for clarification of something you said about the old one, if that's not too much trouble. —Tamfang 05:17, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested in the topic, mostly since I've been annoyed how best to explain/label what the diagrams are. I'd call the Jenn curved diagrams as uniform 3-sphere surface tessellations, viewed by stereographic projection from 4-space into 3-space. ANYWAY to Tamfang's question (maybe), I see the curved projection is preserving angles from the 3-sphere surface tessellation, not the 4-space regular polytope. (Sometime I'd like to get some regular polyhedron stereographic projections, curved and linear edges for comparsion as well.) Tom Ruen 17:23, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's how I see it too. —Tamfang 05:17, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

book cover

Does someone want to give a fair use rationale for the cover? I don't know if there is one, and I'm not particularly motivated, even though I'm the one who scanned it. —Tamfang (talk) 23:01, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The warning message says this, so how about just uploading a smaller image? Tom Ruen (talk) 02:43, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This non-free media file should be replaced with a smaller version to comply with Wikipedia's non-free content policy and United States copyright law.