Talk:List of mathematical shapes

Other Shapes

. and it would be rather nice if pictures accompanied each shape, and the shapes were further classified, eg. for 2D shapes with 1 surface, perhaps classify the shapes against their number of straight sides, and number of curved sides.

This list seems incomplete. I'm interested in finding names for two simple shapes that don't appear to be listed currently:

Shape 1. A 2D shape, sector of an annulus, ie. a shape with two regular curves with the same origin as opposite sides, and where the remaining sides are straight, and if extended would pass through the same origin.

Shape 2. A 2D shape, the shape of a running track, including a 3D version being the shape of a chain link.

Thanks. Anonymous

Surfaces

So for an N dimension shape, the maximum number of surfaces can only be N-1? If this is correct is it worth noting? Hullo exclamation mark (talk) 11:10, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Undefined

The article does not explain what is meant by M D with N D surface. For some entries the shape itself is an M-dimensional manifold, in other cases it is embedded in an M-dimensional manifold. Lines exist in any N-dimensional Euclidean space with N ≥ 1. Under the usual definition of surface, a surface is a 2-dimensional manifold, so what is an "1D surface" or a "3D surface"? Is the intention "boundary"? Then what we see also doesn't make much sense. To start with, it depends on the embedding; a line segment (I assume that is what is meant by "interval" here) embedded in one-dimensional space has a boundary consisting of its two end points, and in higher-dimensional spaces it is its own boundary. Clearly, 1D with 0D boundary is not correct except in a pathological case. --Lambiam 13:00, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed this naming system which is a bit odd. I would propose something like

Zero dimensional
curves and polygons in the plane
curves in 3D
surfaces in 3D

with a note after each section explaining that these are k-dimensional manifolds and that the shapes can exist in higher dimensions.--Salix (talk): 10:24, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved, obviously, since the proposal doesn't make much sense, and no rationale was given. —innotata 20:39, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of mathematical shapes → List of shape topics in various fields. – Please place your rationale for the proposed move here. 108.65.82.238 (talk) 21:32, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – No rationale stated; "and other topics" is not an appropriate or useful part of an article title. Dicklyon (talk) 03:12, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The present title is bad, but the proposed title is worse; "and other topics" has no place in a well-defined list. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 03:29, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.65.82.238 (talk) 19:00, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The above !vote was lodged by the nominator
  - Comment you support your own proposition, so obviously, you are following this discussion. So why don't you actually provide a reasoning for your proposal? There are comments lodged on your inadequate formulation, which you should address. -- 70.51.46.146 (talk) 05:03, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose and revert to the 2.5kB version. This is a mathematics list, please STOP changing the topic of the list to suit your own agenda. Articles should not exceed 30kB in size, 300kB is far too large. Non-mathematics topics should not be listed on this page. Instead start a new article, if you don't know how, use the WP:Article wizard. Further, there should be subarticles for all the additional material that was added in the mathematics subject area, as this page is now greatly oversized, and will cause problems on all sort of platforms (such as mobile web browsers) -- 70.51.46.146 (talk) 05:23, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

bold amendment by chainsaw

I hacked out a bunch of kitchen sinks; more needs doing; maybe some bits ought to be restored. —Tamfang (talk) 09:38, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would go much further. Probably back to the shorter much shorter list with links to more detailed lists on other pages. [1] is a reasonable base at 2,473 bytes. Algebraic curves and the more exotic polyhedra are such as List of polygons, polyhedra and polytopes.--Salix alba (talk): 13:16, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm halfway through looking at the 1.8e3 links in the longest version. About two-thirds of them really are mathematical shapes; others are mathematical but not shapes (e.g. theorems; List of topics related to π) or not distinctive shapes (e.g. Tamfang's Circle) or shapes but not mathematical (e.g. I-beam) or … (e.g. List of traffic circles in New Jersey). I haven't yet tried counting those that can be collapsed to a list-link such as Johnson solid. —Tamfang (talk) 22:11, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First pass done.

1005 shapes

Some hundreds of these can be omitted because they're listed in a page such as Johnson solid or Uniform polyhedron compound. —Tamfang (talk) 08:54, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Does Lists of shapes make this page redundant? —Tamfang (talk) 16:16, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's a list of lists, so no. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 12:47, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

November 2

I cut the byte count in half, mainly by removing

tables of properties of fractals, pasted from another article
shapes that are not mathematically defined
mathematical entities that have no distinctive shape – Foo's Point, Bar's Line, Untel's Circle, Triangle of Quatloo
concepts that are not shapes at all
one or two endless lists of parallel items (e.g.: pentagonal prism, hexagonal prism, heptagonal prism, octagonal prism, enneagonal prism, decagonal prism, hendecagonal prism, dodecagonal prism) that no one is going to click separately

I moved the list of polytopes from the top of the article to be nearer the list of regular polytopes at the bottom of the article; still needs beating into shape but I'm tired of it for now.

I'd also cut the lists of Johnson solids, nonconvex uniform polyhedra, and uniform compounds: readers are far less likely, I think, to click on such entries on this page than on the respective list pages (which have pictures). But I won't do that before discussion. If they are cut, the number of entries should be noted. —Tamfang (talk) 20:55, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"surface"

In the heading "1D with 0D surface", the word "surface" is wrong. A surface is a 2-dimensional manifold. Michael Hardy (talk) 15:55, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We can make it "boundary" – if indeed that classification is deemed useful. —Tamfang (talk) 20:40, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Shape

This page went from over 99kb to the 2.1kb.

Articles should not exceed 30kb, 90kb is way too large. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.65.82.27 (talk • contribs)

There's no size-cap for articles, articles can be as long as they need to be. George.Edward.C – Talk – Contributions 13:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reported. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:16, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of mathematical shapes. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:28, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Placing 'mathematical shapes' that do not have a wikipedia article

If a shape does not have a wikipedia article attached to it, when adding the shape you must prove that it: A: Exists B: It is allowed on this list (i.e. they need to be 'mathematically well-defined shapes')

Please use <ref> and </ref> tags to ensure that bots can tell they are references (so that they can add archive URLs etc.).

Thanks Dreamy Jazz (talk) 19:31, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Scutoid

The popular news is enjoying a "new shape" called a Scutoid. See, for example: https://www.popsci.com/new-shape-scutoid It would be helpful for Wikipedia to have some place to address this. Perhaps a list of new names for old shapes, or alternative names etc. In any case, as search for "scutoid" throughout the full scope of Wikipedia should have some informative result. Thanks! --Lbeaumont (talk) 14:45, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am pleased to see an excellent new Wikipedia article on the Scutoid. How can it best be listed in this article? Thanks! --Lbeaumont (talk) 20:40, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Knots and links

A knot is an embedding of a topological circle S¹ in 3-dimensional Euclidean space, R³ (also known as E³), considered up to continuous deformations and a link is a collection non-intersecting knots.

Should Knots and links be included?

Plesiohedron

”Plesiohedron” has a mathematical definition and is not included. It seems that “plesiohedron” is a group of polyhedra, so should it still be added? Existent human being (talk) 09:38, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]