User talk:Tomruen

This is Tomruen's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives:

User:Tomruen/archive1 May 2004-Dec 2007
User:Tomruen/archive2 Jan 2008-Dec 2008

2009 comments

hyperbolic honeycombs

Congratulations. Now I just need to learn to write a (nonEuclidean) ray-tracer ...

Wendy mentions some nonWythoff forms in Talk:Polychoron#H3. (I should save that section somewhere so I can more readily find it again.) One infinite family, the "bollochomea" whatever that means, includes both {4,3,5} and {4,3,4} as special cases. —Tamfang (talk) 21:16, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

E8 Graph

Hey, would you mind using Image:E8 graph.svg on your user page instead of E8 graph2.svg. That way the second one could be deleted. Thanks. --TruthfulCynic 04:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Tom Ruen (talk) 04:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Polyhedron databases

I was looking at how the polyhedron db's you made worked...neat. I work on a smaller wiki, and I had independently made a different kind of database for something totally unrelated...anyway, it uses the {{#switch: parser function to call up the correct data, and then it uses a second template to organize the data. I though you method of instead giving each a name was a very cool way of doing it, and I wanted to compliment you. Timeroot (talk) 03:00, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I only copied the idea from User:Salix_alba. SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 03:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Runcinated 120-cell

Hi Tom Ruen!

I looked at this file: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Runcinated_120-cell.png, and I think there's a problem: we should not see a Rhombicosidodecahedron for the convex envelope, but a dodecahedron (or a tetrahedron, a triangular prism etc). Did you halve it for a better view? Padex (talk) 16:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Padex. I looked at Stella4D. Apparently it is drawing a "perspective" view of ~129 degree field-of-view so the central cell does not "envelope" the other cells. I was meaning to generate a new set of systematic images in each family, and never got past the 5-cell 8/16-cell families. Sorry it is confusing now. Tom Ruen (talk) 18:04, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lunar parallax image

Hi, Tomruen, I was looking at a few of your Wikipedia images, and they look really neat -- specially to one who, like me, doesn't have that graphics skill. So I generally admire your contributions.

There's a couple of problems, though, with one of the images. I wonder if maybe it would interest you to confirm that, and (if agreed) possibly fix them in a fresh version of the image?

This is about the lunar parallax synthesis at [1]. This looks like a potentially very neat illustration of lunar parallax. But as it stands, I see the following practical problems with it:

(1) The four lunar crescents look so dark in the image, relative to the black background, that the crescents hardly show up at all on many of the computer screen settings that I have tried. The stars are hard to see also.

(2) The commentary says that all the viewing positions are on a great circle forming a square. The text embedded in the image says the viewing positions are on the equator at 0 d and 180 d longitude, and at the north and south poles. But these positional data look a very long way off being correct.

On the given date 1988 March 22, at 10:42 UT, the (geocentric) position of the Moon was (in ecliptic terms) at longitude 59d 38' 26" and latitude +4d 51' 10" (North). In equatorial terms it was at right ascension 3h 45m 12.1s, and declination +24d 48' 50.0" (North), and its horizontal parallax was about 57.4'. (This 57.4' should also be about the angular radius of the circle in the sky on which your four parallax points fall.)

On that date, and at that time, the Moon would therefore have been overhead, within a degree, at about geographical location 24.82 deg North, and 76 deg East, and relative to the stars it should then have been placed about the center between your four parallax points.

I can't see if your four parallax points of he Moon are exactly to the celestial North, South, East and West of the center, but if they are, then the corresponding geographical viewing position for the Moon at your North parallax point would have been at about 65.18 deg South, 76 deg East, where the Moon might be seen peeping up over the horizon for a very short time on a day when otherwise it would hardly rise, or not rise at all -- at the start of a period of a few days of that month when the moon, in spite of its waxing phase, would be too far north to be seen.

For the South parallax point, the view would have been as from about 65.18 deg North, 104 degrees West. At that place and time the Moon would have been starting to become circumpolar for a few days during that month, and at your chosen time it would have been about grazing the northern horizon at its lower culmination, instead of setting.

The viewing positions for the East and West parallax points would have been on the Equator, at about 14 deg. West and 166 deg. East, with the Moon on about the north-east and north-west horizons respectively.

I hope I worked those numbers out ok, and that it's still a matter of interest to you.

Best wishes, Terry0051 (talk) 12:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was made relatively quickly, hopefully accurately labeled, but I'd have to redo it to check. Ideally it would be done from around a tangent cone where the moon at the horizon to show the maximum parallel, but I just typed in fixed lat/long that were far apart.. SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 01:13, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a quick remake, as 4 images, with different orientation (up-vector). File:Lunarparallax22-3-1988-table.png. So looks close to me. SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 01:24, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Uniform tiling 37-t0.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Uniform tiling 37-t0.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's also STRONGLY suggested that you check with the programs authors, that they don't claim any additional rights in program output generated.

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have email contact with the software author. I figure there's enough information for my patience. Thanks for asking. Tom Ruen (talk) 01:39, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great, if you can get them to confirm the program output is OK with the OTRS permissions queue even better.

I note some other programs from the same author that might yield some useful images :).

Jeff Weeks generated a number of images by my requestion for Wikipedia, like File:Hyperbolic_orthogonal_dodecahedral_honeycomb.png, and has given me "hack" versions to do specific variations I've wanted. Tom Ruen (talk) 16:06, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow

I saw this image of yours. It's great! Keep it up! --116.14.72.74 (talk) 06:18, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--116.14.72.74 (talk) 06:18, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But exactly how I'm going to try making it myself is beyond me... --116.14.72.74 (talk) 06:18, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I signed the post here four times so that SineBot doesn't come and try signing every single line. --116.14.72.74 (talk) 06:18, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You should really look into Stella (software), foldable nets for every polyhedron under the sun! Tom Ruen (talk) 17:25, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help!

Please help me with this template: Template:Polyhedron navigator. --Euclidthegreek (talk) 11:58, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just got back online now. Wow! That's scary big! Unsure what should be done. It does seem nice to have one specialized for the Johnson Solids or other groups individually perhaps? --Tom Ruen (talk)

I made a specialised one for the Johnson solids: Template:Johnson solids navigator. Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 08:26, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's one for near misses: Template:Near-miss Johnson solids navigator. Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 08:31, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good on Johnson solids, although I keep wondering if images aren't worth adding. I don't do much with "navigators"!

I don't think the near misses are worth a template. They really individually don't deserve individual articles on this basis alone.

Tom Ruen (talk) 08:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image

File:Uniform_polyhedron-23-t01.png

Excuse my asking, but shouldn't t_0,1{2, 3} be a triangular prism instead? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Professor Fiendish (talk • contribs) 03:31, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you're right! Wythoff_symbol#Dihedral_symmetry_.28q.3Dr.3D2.29, t_0,1{2, 6} = t_0,1,2{2, 3} = hexagonal prism. Tom Ruen (talk) 23:23, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded a new copy under the correct name File:Uniform_polyhedron-23-t012.png and marked the old name for deletion! Tom Ruen (talk) 23:27, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tetradecagon, hexadecagon, octadecagon

Are there images missing? Also, on my screen the figures clash with the infobox. Your screen may be unusually wide. Xanthoxyl (talk) 20:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry yes. They don't exist yet. I can make PNG for the higher n-simplex graphs at least, although would be nicer as SVG. Tom Ruen (talk) 21:10, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ditopes and hosotopes

I haven't used Jenn in a while; let's see what happens ...

	$ jenn
	dyld: Library not loaded: /sw/lib/libpng.3.dylib
	  Referenced from: /Users/anton/bin/jenn
	  Reason: image not found
	Trace/BPT trap

Oh well. I may have to ask Fritz about that library. —Tamfang (talk)

Proposed deletion of Hemipolycron

The article Hemipolycron has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Tomruen I don't like to badger other users into doing things but it looks like I'll need you to upload some images for the hemipolycra. It'll at least have some content. By the way does the octahemioctahedron have tetrahedral or octahedral symmetry? That would explain

and

. Thanks. Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 14:37, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you add more content now, you will just have to add it again to Hemipolyhedron when this one gets deleted. I'd suggest that you work on the article that's going to stay - I already copied the present content across for you. -- Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 14:43, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks Steelpillow, I propose redirecting Hemipolycron to Hemipolyhedron, since they're duals of each other. Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 14:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New WikiProject

I think you'd be interested in WikiProject Polyhedra. Hope to see you around there! Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 04:02, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Dissected regular icosahedron

The article Dissected regular icosahedron has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No meaningful content; an image with the same title as article.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:34, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I made a redirect for it to a section of grand antiprism. Tom Ruen (talk) 22:52, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hemipolycra

Hi Tomruen, you can make Stella show more of the hemipolycra faces by doing Ctrl+Left-Drag. Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 05:48, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. The Hemipolyhedron#Duals_of_the_hemipolyhedra images were not from Stella. It makes really short prisms. I retraced them (and poorly color-shaded), mostly from Mathworld images. Tom Ruen (talk) 05:49, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stella can grow the prisms to any length you want, just as the good Prof. describes. -- Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 20:15, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposition

I propose making a template for all uniform polyhedra instead of the old ones. (We might also have one for duals.) Uniform index would be fine. After U75 we could put Skilling's figure and then go through some of the prisms and antiprisms. (BTW, why is it U75 and Skilling are the only polyhedra that don't have their duals shown?) Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 05:40, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to try a new template and we'll see how it looks. I added the U75 dual image, wasn't added before because it was one of the ugly "hemi" forms with vertices at infinity, but I used your trick to extend the default prism sizes in stella. Oh, and Skilling's dual is visually identical, linked to the same image. Tom Ruen (talk) 18:05, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking of something like the minor planets navigator we have. Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 05:56, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Template:MinorPlanets Navigator. I wonder how they did that. Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 05:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's template substitution, { { { 1 } } } represents first item after template name.

I'd appreciate it if you put {{talkback}} on my talk page whenever you reply, I don't need to keep checking back. Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 05:10, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I think I'll be lazy, whatever that is. You can just put a watch on my page, and look for the section header of interest.

It looks like

Hello, Tomruen. You have new messages at Example's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

. Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 08:11, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Snub

How do you make snub with KaleidoTile?!? I've been trying for ages! Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 05:44, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]