Talk:Convex uniform honeycomb

message: I did a Google search on:
http://www.google.com/search?q=Andreini+tessellation
and got no results? Is Andreini the proper name? --css
Some searches for some of the tilings suggest that none of the google pages mention the concept.  Andreini is the name used by books I have, but someone else is welcome to change it if they have a better name.
:Since web search delivers no clue, could you add the "hardcopy" refrences of books you mentioned please? Mikkalai 08:03, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Likely it's impossible in some (or most) of the 230 space groups to find a point which has equal distance to enough of its images to form closed cells.  —Tamfang 08:04, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  most of these tesselations actually lie in just three space groups: body-centered cubic, the cubic, and face-centered cubic symmetries. There is one (maybe two) with the symmetry of the diamond lattice, and a few with some of the uninteresting reflection groups. In short, none of the bizarro symmetries are represented, so the claim may be more plausible than it sounds. On the other hand, what does it mean to say that a tesselation appears in a crystal arrangement? -- strauss at uark.edu
----
I added an enumerations of the 28 tessellations, using the added online links provided. I grouped them as best I could for a first pass. Obviously some pictures need to be added.
The dynamic VRML models (from the first link) were very effective in showing the arrangements of polyhedra at each vertex. For single-view images, transparent faces might be more helpful. Maybe I can manipulate the settings a bit to get some good pictures.
Tom Ruen 12:08, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: See User:Tamfang/Tilings: skeleton images of bitruncated, cantellated, cantitruncated, runcitruncated and omnitruncated cubic tilings.  More to come!  —Tamfang 07:45, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Very cool! For fun I linked a thumb image for first in the article. Tom Ruen 09:21, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  skeleton images 

message: The duals of hexagonal-prismatic and triangular-prismatic are not uniform: the edges are not equal.  —Tamfang 07:40, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  the prismatics 

message: I agree that some of the edge views are not helpful, particularly those in which the edges continue through the vertices.  At least they were easy to make. ;)  It might help to make the edges parti-colored so that e.g. triangles have white edges, squares have yellow edges and so on.  I'm unsure how to code that idea.  —Tamfang 16:19, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  illustration 

message: I completed stub articles for all the nonprismatic forms. Just dropped in a sentence and nearly empty table. I figured it was worth the start for completeness since we had images. Lots of table fields to fill. All my time is done for now! Tom Ruen 00:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Get some sleep ;)  —Tamfang 06:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub articles 

message: I used Grumbaum's paper to cross reference the honeycombs from varied sources. I also reordered them to match Johnson's indexing, since the truncation operation approach (for cubic at least) matches his derviations. For the cubics I also added four cell columns, as done with the uniform polychoron article. I've not seen Johnson's 1991 paper, but it looks like he had a systematic nonseequential approach for indexing that skipped numbers and grouped them into 10's. Tom Ruen 18:03, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference indexing 

message: The list of figures i use is of my device.  George Olshevsky quotes me as discovering two in the 143 convex tilings in four dimensions.  1 occurs in 1dt, 1-4 in 2dt, 1-6 in 3dt.  This list arranges all of the prism-layers at the beginning.  So 1 designates the square, cubic, tesseractic, etc.  The 8 at #2 include hexagon-prisms, etc.  Because we count the cubic at #1, it is removed from later contention.  This is why 434 gives only 7, and 434 only 14.
1.  The comb products on the horogon (square, cubic, tesseractic, etc)
-.  in one dimension: 1 
2.  Ten non-comb tilings in 3d: 44 = 2, 36 = 6. 
3.  The snubs on 44 and 36 
4   The laminate tiling LC1P 
-.  In two dimensions, 11 
5.  Wythoff Mirror edge on these groups 434 (7), 43A (4) and 3333: 1 
6.  Laminate tilings: LC2, LC2P, LB2, LA2P, LB2P 
-.  In 3 dimensions. 28 
7.  55 products of #2 * #2.
8   Wythoff's Mirror edge on 3343 (28), 4334 (14), 433A (4), E33A (0), 33333: (7) = 53
9   The snub tiling s3433 
10  The laminate tilings LB3, LC3, LA3P, LB3P, LC3P, LC1A2, LC1B2, LC1C2 = 8 
-.  In four dimensions, 145 
This list consists of 145, not 143 that George gives.  I am not shure which two he suppresses.
--Wendy.krieger 10:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Wendy. I'll get through George's list sometime soon and compare myself. Tom Ruen (talk) 07:10, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

text: I was just thinking the same thing - the page is taking noticably long to load.  Something like Convex uniform honeycombs in hyperbolic space might be a bit more evocative, I think. Antony-22 (talk) 06:41, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of figures 

message: I added two sections for noncompact honeycombs in Euclidean 3-space, and compact honeycombs in hyperbolic 3-space. Just a start, just included Coxeter groups so far. Probably I'll move them to the end and expand the intro when I get the enumeration included. Tom Ruen (talk) 07:10, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just thinking the same thing - the page is taking noticably long to load.  Something like Convex uniform honeycombs in hyperbolic space might be a bit more evocative, I think. Antony-22 (talk) 06:41, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Noncompact and hyperbolic honeycombs 

message: Using the vertex figure diagrams for the uniform 4-polytopes in Conway's new book, I made some crude diagrams for vertex figures for the cubic honeycomb family. I think they're simpler than the 3D diagrams which don't have edges labeled by face order. I colored them based on {p,q,r}={4,3,4}, with red={p}, green={q}, purple={r}, yellow={}x{}={4}
:
I'll be doing the same for the uniform polychora (Talk:Uniform_polychoron#Vertex_figures), but thought I'd start here. If this is good, perhaps someone with SVG skills can make some nicer ones! Tom Ruen (talk) 23:41, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Mine are prettier but these are more useful. —Tamfang (talk) 10:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

text: I started adding the diagram vertex figures, some missing, some "mis-colored" from a different symmetry, but I'll upload more when I finish them. Tom Ruen (talk) 22:27, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

text: I think I have all the new (tetrahedral domain) vertex figures completed and checked. Tom Ruen (talk) 22:16, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vertex figures 

message: "Convex uniform honeycombs" is not a common phrase, and it can't possibly be a great deal of trouble for someone knowledgeable on the subject to take a couple of minutes to define exactly what that means at the beginning of the article.
After someone went to a great deal of trouble to list all the cases diagrammatically, surely letting readers know *what* is being listed would improve the quality of the article dramatically.
One more thing: Is it common to list as a reference to a Wikipedia article an unpublished manuscript (and especially one that has no description of where it can be found)?  I think not. But two such manuscripts are listed as references for this article.Daqu (talk) 16:28, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: On references, Branko Grünbaum's paper Uniform tilings of 3-space is the ONLY print-published source of the complete listing of 28 forms. He used the paper to describe the incompleteness of the original 1905 listing of 25 forms, and gives credit to normal Johnson and I. Alexeyev for their unpublished enumerations that preceeded his. He referenced Johnson's book as a manuscript, so I figured it was valid to do the same. I've not seen Alexeyev's listing in any form. I've seen George Olshevsky's enumeration as a PDF. Tom Ruen (talk) 21:39, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maybe define the subject of the article? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Convex uniform honeycomb. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050113123708/http://www.n55.dk/manuals/DISCUSSIONS/OTHER_TEXTS/CM_TEXT.html to http://www.n55.dk/MANUALS/DISCUSSIONS/OTHER_TEXTS/CM_TEXT.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140429195143/http://media.accademiaxl.it/memorie/Serie3_T14.pdf to http://media.accademiaxl.it/memorie/Serie3_T14.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:48, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It would be nice of the Archimedean components of the honeycomb could be instantly read off in the tables. Currently their names are not listed, unfortunately.216.161.117.162 (talk) 21:20, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  It would be nice of the Archimedean components of the honeycomb could be instantly read off in the tables