Talk:Crystallography

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Physics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ]
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics.

Help with this template Please rate this article, and then leave comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify its strengths and weaknesses.
WikiProject Chemistry
Chemistry Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, which collaborates on Chemistry and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

The naval research lab has a page of images of crystal structures all of which are PD. Zeimusu 13:50, 2004 Dec 24 (UTC)

I can't access the link you're giving. Is it just me ? --Totophe64 23:51, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] History

The article could use a bit of the history, how the science developed & by who. All I know is, there was x-ray crystallography done c 1912. Trekphiler 18:26, 6 December 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Electron diffraction

I'd like to remove this sentence "Thus far, electron diffraction has not been widely used." since, in my opinion, it's not quite correct. It depends, of course, on what you mean by "widely used", but practically all work with transmission electron microscopy will involve an element of electron diffraction (at least in materials science and solid state physics/chemistry) and this consitiutes "wide use" in my opinion. Anyway, electron diffraction can't be any more rare than neutron diffraction? O. Prytz 08:36, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, electron diffraction is much used in Chemistry and Physics, but not so much in BioChemistry or Mineralogy ( where X-rays are extensively used ). Well, this isn't the most important, but we can modify it ;). Anyway, neutron diffraction is much more rare than electron diffraction. --Totophe64 14:42, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

I changed it. I also added a new paragraph at the end of the introduction detailing the different types of radiation-sample interactions. Not realy sure if that fits in there. O. Prytz 15:39, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
I don't see where it could fit else ... I think it's good where it is ;-) !!--Totophe64 00:48, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pole?

The current article reads In fact, the pole to each face is plotted on the net. This is the only mention of pole on the page, so it isn't really explained very well. It links to a disambiguation page (probably a bad idea) where we find

In crystallography, a pole is a line perpendicular to a crystal face that is used to plot that face on a stereographic net. This allows the 3D aspect of the face to be plotted in 2 dimensions.

This is also confusing (sounds kind of like a surface normal to me) and really doesn't belong on a disambiguation page anyways, so I offer it you to include somewhere on this page, or another page (but not on the dismabiguation page), or to toss. Ewlyahoocom 09:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Scientists of note

I've moved the "see also" links to people to a section on their own, and then expanded the section. The list is far from complete, and I would suggest that there's a case for these links being in a separate page. 09:05, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] list of crystal topics or list of crystallography topics?

Neither of these exists. Should they? Michael Hardy 19:37, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I recently added this link Commission on Crystallographic Teaching, Pamphlets

There is a lot of good information there, and im sure some of it should be added to this article. I do not, however, know the kind of usage this site allows. And I cant seem to find it either. BlindEagle42 22:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Isotypes and Isomorphs

When looking at the disambiguation page for Isotype, it says that "In crystallography, an "Isotype" is a synonym for isomorph". However, the Isomorph article is about a developmental biology topic, not a crystallography topic. When I do a Search on "Isomorph", there seem to be many different uses of the concept of "isomorphism", and so an Isomorph disambiguation page might be needed. Oddly, there is an Isomophism disambiguation page, but it doesn't have the crystallography usage and has a different biology usage.

Since I know almost nothing about crystallography, perhaps someone could make, if appropriate, a page for Isomorph_(crystallography) and an Isomorph disambiguation page, and improve the Isomorphism (disambiguation) page.

Perhaps, it might be best to somehow merge or realign the articles about isomorph and isomorphism, but I don't know how to do that.

Thanks, --MatthewBChambers 23:29, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I regret I have no time to work here (I'm taking care of the same subject on the French wikipedia), but I can give an indication for the answer [1] (I contribute there too). --Mahlerite 14:25, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] David Harker

Can anyone throw any light on this phrase please: "the John Wayne of crystallography" was the description given by Luzzati* of David Harker, the American X-ray crystallographer?

  • Vittorio Luzzati, a crystallographer at the Centre for Molecular Genetics in Gif-sur-Yvette near Paris, France

Thanks,

nitramrekcap 91.110.198.120 (talk) 17:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image for article

The image Image:X2SwithLogoMarch2008.jpg has been contributed by Michael Willett (as User:MikeW25), a PR officer from Bruker. I am about to remove it for the second time, as I don't think it adds materially to the article—at least not enough so to justify giving pride of place to a big Bruker logo.

I have encouraged Mike to seek images that illustrate important operating principles of the instrument, rather than just offering 'brochure' photos of gray boxes. I also welcome discussion on this question here or on other, appropriate talk pages. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps an alternative to using a photo of equipment would be to add a photo of some crystals, or diagrams of unit cells? --Itub (talk) 15:15, 9 June 2008 (UTC)