Talk:Miller index

message: The plane [111] is wrong in the first diagram.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pcflet01 (talk • contribs) 20:33, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong Diagram

message: In the introduction is stated "The integers are usually written in lowest terms, i.e. their greatest common divisor should be 1.", but isn't that wrong? i.e., (111) isn't the same as (222). 137.122.14.20 (talk) 18:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Lowest terms?

message: I am planning to restructure this article further. I think the reciprocal lattice should get less attention, certainly in the lead and in the beginning of the article. (I had a student who tried to understand Miller indices and looked it up here on wikipedia, and did not find it helpful at all.) /Pieter Kuiper 07:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simplification 

message: Given the ambiguity of left-handed vs right-handed 3D coordinate systems, I think image depicting miller planes should be altered to reflect which is the y and which is the x-axis.  Anybody want to take this on?  In my mineralogy class and textbook, only the right-handed system is used so the unlabeled left-hand coordinates on the illustration were really confusing at first.  It's important to realize that people from multiple disciplines (not just engineering) could be looking at this article, so a little clarification could go a long way in making this article more accessible. 
--ThinkGreen (talk) 12:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Which image are you looking at?  As far as I can tell, all of them are right-handed, and all of them are labelled sufficiently to determine this fact.  (However, one of them misspells "plane" as "plan", which should be fixed.)  —Steven G. Johnson (talk) 16:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguous 3D Coordinate System 

message: can anyone tell me why four indices are used in hexagonal systems?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sry19206 (talk • contribs) 16:35, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In a haxagonal system hkl miller indices are enough to define a plane or a direction, however, You will prefer to use four hkil indices, because this way equivalent planes/directions will have similar indices. E.g. the unit cell defines 3 lattice unit vectors a, b, and c. Between a and b there is a 120° angle. With miller indices You would write a=[100], b=[010] and a+b=[110]. If You look carefully a+b is just the same as a or b, only rotated by 60°. So it is convenient to have a notation where this similarity is apparent. in the hkil notation a is 2,-1,-1, 0 while a+b is 1,1,-2,0. They look similar, that is why we use this notation. 2001:4C4D:2B06:D800:CCEA:9A42:B1D1:8D0 (talk) 11:24, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rationale for four miller indices in hexagonal cell 

message: Figure 3 has a typo: "plan", which should be "plane". Also figures 2 and 3 are not neat. We should upload new and clear figures. It will be difficult for new students to learn anything from these figures. Drajput (talk) 14:42, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed typo. Please be more clear on "not neat". Materialscientist (talk) 23:30, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Typo

message: The right diagram in third picture from top has the wrong plane indices: it's 112 and not 221  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.94.216.91 (talk) 04:19, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: They follow the definition given left to the figure, and thus can't be wrong :-). Materialscientist (talk) 04:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  wrong indices 

message: I think we should harmonize the type of brackets used throughout the article. Different brackets have or could have been used to display the "same" shape, especially the angled brackets. There are:
# \left\langle 111 \right\rangle TeX/math-mode \left\langle and \right\rangle
::+ Can be rendered as graphics.
::- Maybe not displayed on text-only readers?
# <111> less-than/greater-than signs (Unicode U+003c, U+003e)
::+ Is available as ASCII character.
::- Wrong semantic meaning, not quite correct rendering.
# 〈111〉 Technical left/right-pointing angle brackets (Unicode U+2329, U+232a)
::+ Nice rendering. (On my screen.)
::- Upon preview, it gets automatically converted into 〈111〉 Chinese, Japanese and Korean punctuation mark: left/right angle brackets ??!!
# ❬111❭ Dingbats: left/right-pointing angle bracket ornament (Unicode U+267c, U+267d)
::+ Common on MS Windows machines.
::- Wrong semantic meaning, not quite correct rendering.
# ⟨111⟩ mathematical left/right brackets (Unicode U+27e8, U+27e9)
::+ Nice rendering. (On my screen.)
::- Nothing?
# 〈111〉 Chinese, Japanese and Korean punctuation mark: left/right angle brackets (Unicode U+3008, U+3009)
::+ Nice rendering. (On my screen.)
::- Wrong semantic meaning.
# Anything else?
From the above, my first choice would be the ⟨111⟩ mathematical left/right brackets (Unicode U+27e8, U+27e9), since the indices are a mathematical representation of the crystal planes or directions. My second choice could be the 〈111〉 Technical left/right-pointing angle brackets (Unicode U+2329, U+232a), but I have the problem that they get converted into 〈111〉 Chinese, Japanese and Korean punctuation marks every time I preview my edits! Do you have any comments on this?  Zeptomoon chat/chase 13:05, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: No comments within a week... I'll go for the ⟨111⟩ mathematical left/right brackets (Unicode U+27e8, U+27e9).  Zeptomoon chat/chase 18:20, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which ⟨angled⟩ brackets to use? 

message: (u v t w)--->(u' v' w')
u=1/3(2u'-v')
v=1/3(2v'-u')
w=w'
t=-(u+v) Saleh Tabatabaei (talk) 12:16, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hexagonal 

message: Following the reciprocal definition:
"Then, given the three Miller indices h, k, ℓ, (hkℓ) denotes planes orthogonal to the reciprocal lattice vector:", Ghkl.
We then talk about '(hkℓ)' as vector :
"That is, (hkℓ) simply indicates a normal to the planes in the basis of the primitive reciprocal lattice vectors. Because the coordinates are integers, this normal is itself always a reciprocal lattice vector." 
When it was just defined as a plane orthogonal to the vector, Ghkl, is this sentence not instead describing the vector Ghkl itself? Or have I misunderstood the definition? Grand Admiral Archduke (talk) 17:48, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in 'Definitions'? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Miller index. 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/20060208140059/http://www.ece.byu.edu/cleanroom/EW_orientation.phtml to http://www.ece.byu.edu/cleanroom/EW_orientation.phtml
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) 11:09, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)