Talk:Boerdijk–Coxeter helix

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics 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.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's priority scale.

Polyhedra

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Polyhedra, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of polygons, polyhedra, and other polytopes 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.PolyhedraWikipedia:WikiProject PolyhedraTemplate:WikiProject PolyhedraPolyhedra articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Start

I know it's not much of a page yet, but i expect some help on it soon, and i promised i'd make a start for it. Any help is appreciated.

- bart van oort - 2008-09-04

I added some semi-random links, and added some of my own graphics. Tom Ruen (talk) 01:55, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

strange insertions

165.228.111.227 (talk · contribs) has several times inserted weird sentences:

"Tetrahedra are unilaterally cosined against the heraclitean plane" (30 Aug 2009)
"London dispersion forces are colineally arranged in a boolean triagram to offset the isomeric aspect." (26 Aug 2010)
"The Helices are counter isomeric to the interchange of electron flow." (17 Jan 2011)
"The synergistic intertwining of the lateral helices are cosined against the perpendicular axial stack." (2 Feb 2011)

London dispersion force at least is a real concept, so I hesitated to assume that it's junk; but now that I've listed these all together I see that no two of these insertions have anything in common (except "cosined against"), so it's implausible that they have any serious intent. —Tamfang (talk) 19:34, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching the newest vandalism! Apparently someone is practicing fake technobabble, maybe looking for a career in broadcasting? Tom Ruen (talk) 21:20, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reverse the polarity of the neutron flow! —Tamfang (talk) 06:18, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

citations?

Dear Wikipedia guys,

This page contains an interesting claim that appears on the 600-cell page as well, namely that the 600-cell decomposes into a union of 20 solid tori each with a triangulation that locally looks like this helix formed of tetrahedra in such a way that there is a simplicial map to the boundary complex of the icosahedron such that the each solid torus maps to a face and the fiber over each vertex is a Hopf circle. The usual procedure when publishing such a claim is to provide a citation to literature that gives a proof or at least a claim of a proof as in a research announcement.

Perhaps I'm not searching carefully enough, but I do not see such a proof in any of the cited literature on this page. The scholarly value of the article would be improved considerably if such a citation were present. 123.116.217.128 (talk) 14:56, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

30-tetrahedron rings are duals of Petrie polygons

The 600-cell partitions into 20 rings of 30 tetrahedra (see article). I noticed that the duals of these rings are Petrie polygons of the 120-cell. Thus, the vertex set of the 120-cell partitions into 20 Petrie polygons. (I discovered this partition of the vertex set 20 years ago, but there is no publication.) Rolfdieter Frank (talk) 06:13, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]