Talk:Body relative direction

message: This article claims that teh left and right brain differ in functions. I read on Wikipedia once that this is a myth. Juan Ponderas
:Lateralization of brain function --J-Star 23:58, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: brain

message: (Which I've tried to correct)
Left and right can be defined precisely using Parity violation in Weak interactions. Of course, the *words* left and right are arbitrary. But nature cares about direction (or more to be more exact, helicity). The article also implicitly confuses *parity* invariance and *translational* invariance.
See this page for more information.
Amcfreely 02:00, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Inaccuracies

message: Is it true you cant explain left and right, you just go in circles? Like: left is not-right. left is west. right is like the shape L. (You always come back to needing a definition for left or right)
: Yes, that is true. There is no universal explanation unless you start using observations of particle physics. The reason we call the directions "left and right" is simply because long ago, we decided to do so. These definitions have since been carried from generation to generation through word of mouth. --J-Star 07:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not believe that this is true. The car diagram and its description in this article do unambiguously distinguish left from right, provided that one already understands that we are looking at the names for opposing relative lateral directions. 71.102.186.234 01:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unexplainable 

message: I rewrote a lot. Either the physics & math stuff is clearer now, or just more tortuously lengthy. Lemme know. Potatoswatter 10:02, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  rewrite 

message: "In order to figure out which hand is which you will need a clock, a compass and the sun. Face the sun and check the compass. Before noon, the compass points to your left hand. After noon, it points to your right. If the compass points forward or backward, or the sun is directly overhead forcing you to lie down, take a nap and try again."
Alex Law 09:36, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps I was trying to be too humorous, but maybe it's better to fix it than remove it entirely? Elsewhere in the article it does promise to let you know which hand is which. Potatoswatter 16:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't worry, it's fixed now. Improvements For All 07:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added clarification that the opposite is true in the southern hemisphere - you guys are always so hemispherist! P g chris (talk) 12:19, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleted unhelpful text

message: In one dimension, up and down are undefined / not applicable.  In two dimensions, up and down are arbitrary.  In three dimensions, up is a vector away from a gravity well, and down is a vector towards a gravity well.  So in four dimensions, up is...?  An interesting way to view time?  Up a time line and down a time line as opposed to seeing time as linear and forward and backward? Master at Arms 21:52, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Up and Down 

message: I think that i have this problem described - i confuse right and left all the time. People who ask me for directions are rather unlucky - i try to be helpful, but often end up sending them miles away from where they want to go :)
Anyway, i hoped to find the scientific name for this problem here and found an unsourced paragraph.
Can anyone cite something?.. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 21:29, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Left/right confusion 

message: I made a small edit to this part. It used to say: 
For example, if someone continues walking forward until they have almost circumnavigated the Earth, they will expend much effort only to move backward slightly. This is because, on Earth, people use a spherical coordinate system wherein the direction vectors depend on position.
I changed the last part because it did not make sense. The coordinate system people on earth (as opposed to where?) use is neither the cause of nor the reason for the fact that you end up in almost the same position when you almost circumnavigate the earth.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.81.194 (talk) 22:06, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geometry of natural environment 

message: How about some discussion of how left and right reverse for certain things?
Eg  if I am looking at a person and a piece of paper, the left side of the person is not the same side as that of the paper, because you take the person's frame of reference in that case?
Segrub (talk) 17:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusions or paradoxes? 

message: By "refimprove" i actually mean "refimprove". Currently the only significant reference is Houston Chronicle, a local news website. The article is not bad and i am under the impression that i have a condition that is very similar to what is described there (see above on this talk page), but having a reference to an article in a scientific jounal will certainly improve the article. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 23:55, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:   Left/right confusion referencing 

message: There is a page titled Other left that redirects to this page, but the phrase is not mentioned in the article. If the redirect is going to exist, than there should be a brief mention that the phrases "other left" or "other right" are sometimes used jocularly when someone confuses the two. Tad Lincoln (talk) 20:19, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other left 

message: some people can't remember their left and right (this is true, you can look it up), if they are in a lifethreatening situation where they need to know fast, this might be the first page they get to.  Look at the german page, it's clear: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rechts but our page actually has the arrow marked "left" pointing to the right of the screen!  In a hurry, someone could make a serious mistake here.  I propose that the page be made more similar to the german page just linked.  Someone's life could depend on this.  82.234.207.120 (talk) 20:19, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: in other words, the image linked should be like looking over the person's shoulder, so that the viewer in front of the screen has the same orientation as the person in the image.  then the viewer's left-right matches the figure's, instead of being the opposite. 82.234.207.120 (talk) 20:22, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

text: I 100% agree that it would be helpful to have a graphic like the German WP's article but in English. Dialmayo 15:08, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  seriously misleading 

message: There were severe problems here and continue to be others.
The stage directions were impossible to understand without already knowing what they meant, which defeated the point, so I have corrected them in line with the article that is linked there.
The ongoing problems, though, are that these and road signs are given as example of egocentric directions -- but neither are. Stage directions don't rely on which way the actors are facing, but simply the stage itself. Indeed, they exist even when no one is on stage. Road signs are not egocentric either. It's just that it's very usual to view them from the same side and orientation, but if someone somehow views them otherwise (say one is printed on transparent perspex by mistake and the driver is on the wrong side of the road -- or more realistically if the passenger has a disability meaning that their head is tilted to the side) then the directions on the sign are still relative to the road, not the person. A convention which would actually be notable to talk about in this context, but which is omitted, is that up on the sign usually means forwards on the road. I don't know whether this is universal -- certainly arrows on signs for pedestrians (e.g. in shopping centres and transport hubs) are not always like this in every country, causing confusion for people who take it for granted from theirs. Salopian (talk) 02:40, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: "defined from the point of view of actors facing the audience" seems clear enough. It doesn't say there has to be an actual actor facing out etc. Johnbod (talk) 10:10, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Traditions and conventions