Talk:Amici prism

Glass Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Glass, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of glass 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.GlassWikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Taskforces/GlassTemplate:WikiProject Glassglass articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Spectroscopy (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spectroscopy, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.SpectroscopyWikipedia:WikiProject SpectroscopyTemplate:WikiProject SpectroscopySpectroscopy articles

Comment

Needs a link to grism too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.237.215.179 (talk) 00:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Too many images

This article has too many images, most of them show the same aspect of the prism, or are more technical than the text. It would make sense to remove all but maybe one or two, and possibly add something like this image from the Dispersion article:

As it actually shows the action of an Amici prism.

I would like to pitch my support for keeping the figure. I think it serves a useful purpose in visualizing what is meant by direction vision dispersion, something which is not explained anywhere else in Wikipedia.NathanHagen (talk) 02:21, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Error in image(?)

The three-prism image seems wrong. It looks like the red light is bent more than the blue light in the left prism, and that the green light isn't bent at all. This is different from what I'd expect from Abbe number and disagrees with the diagram in the linked article. —Ben FrantzDale (talk) 13:43, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Primary topic?

In my education, "Amici prism" has normally been used by default to mean the non-dispersive Amici roof prism. Should we move this article to something like "Amici prism (dispersive)" to make room for a disambiguation page? --SoledadKabocha (talk) 00:37, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The guidelines discourage creating dab pages in cases where there are only two ambiguous articles. The recommended solution for this case is hatnotes at the top of the articles, which I have added.--Srleffler (talk) 03:38, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but I was disputing whether there is a primary topic at all here. --SoledadKabocha (talk) 04:56, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I don't think it matters if there is a primary topic. There aren't enough ambigous meanings for a dab page, so one of the two articles gets the direct term and the other doesn't. Since Amici roof prism has another name, the dispersive prism gets to be at Amici prism.--Srleffler (talk) 05:49, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]