Talk:Glide reflection

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Mathematics Mid‑priority 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-priority on the project's priority scale. Physics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics 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.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is perhaps the most obtuse article have seen in Wikipedia.

I came here because I was intrigued by:

The symmetry observed is not exactly bilaterian, but appears to be a glide reflection, where opposite segments are shifted by half an interval.

In the article on Spriggina, an Ediacaran organism. It sounded like an interesting concept, but I left confused and hurt. Tapatio (talk) 07:44, 12 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

deez nuts — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.42.92.217 (talk) 13:43, 19 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Welcome to Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia wherein very smart people compete with others like then to demonstrate their deep familiarity with many bafflingly complex fields of endeavor, to the exclusion of the so-called "average reader." --Quisqualis (talk) 20:16, 9 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

I came here from sea pens -- a type of sea anemone relative that is the only living organism to demonstrate such an orientation to its segments, and this article is written in such sophisticated text that it's difficult to get a good quick grasp of the definition. And I hesitate to edit it because I'm afraid I don't understand the content well enough. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 14:48, 19 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

same concept. fgnievinski (talk) 04:47, 17 August 2023 (UTC) fgnievinski (talk) 04:47, 17 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Support. The difference between articles is the dimensionality: Glide reflection considers symmetry operations in 2D and Glide plane in 3D. I don't find this an essential difference. Both cases can easily be discussed in the same article. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 07:32, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

I would oppose for now. This page (Glide reflection) has a 'too technical' tag at present and (I concur) is difficult to follow. If it is the same concept as Glide plane then I can’t tell, and dumping the Glide plane content into this article won’t make it any easier to read. A better option would be to improve this page (Glide reflection) so that it is readable; then if it is clear they are the same thing re-propose the merge with a proper rationale. Moonraker12 (talk) 19:37, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

PS: I also note the text states Glide reflection is a 2D function while Glide plane is 3D; and that Glide reflection is in three maths categories while Glide plane is in Crystallography and Symmetry. So I’m not convinced they are the same thing at all. Moonraker12 (talk) 19:39, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Support. The article glide plane is confusing. From what I can tell skimming around the academic literature, "glide reflection" is the operation, and the "glide plane" is the associated (hyper)-plane. For example, from International Tables for Crystallography (2006). Vol. A, Ch. 1.3: "To each glide plane, infinitely many different glide reflections belong, because to each glide vector listed in column 3 any lattice translation vector parallel to the glide plane may be added; this includes centring vectors of centred cells. Each resulting vector is a glide vector of a new glide reflection but with the same plane as the geometric element. Any of these glide operations can be used as a 'defining operation'." –jacobolus (t) 06:41, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

I went ahead and did a merge, but both the content previously here and the new material added from glide plane need a substantial rewrite for better narrative flow, accessibility to less technical readers, and clarity. –jacobolus (t) 22:01, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Moonraker12 Noting that you were opposed to this merge before, does the merger seem okay now, or do you still have concerns? I cleaned up at least the lead section, though the rest is still a bit rough and incomplete. –jacobolus (t) 17:48, 10 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Jacobolus:: Thanks for the notification (sorry for the lateness in replying); I think your additions to the Introduction here make the connection between glide plane and glide reflection much clearer, so your merge makes sense. Regards, Moonraker12 (talk) 21:43, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply