Talk:Point groups in three dimensions
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Merge
I think it would be a good idea to merge this article into the one on point groups. I don't really see that we need a separate aricle for the 3D case. We also have an article on Crystallographic point groups that deals specifically with point groups in crystallography (which i think is ok). So there's in total 3 articles relating to different cases of point groups, which makes it pretty confusing to anyone not familiar with the subject. O. Prytz 00:00, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- I agree, I think the central article should be at point groups too. --HappyCamper 02:40, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
- I do not agree. We have also Point groups in two dimensions. Point group is an introduction for general dimension.--Patrick 08:42, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] sub/super
How about a table something like this:
immediate subgroups | immediate supergroups | ||
---|---|---|---|
Ih | 120 | I, Th, D5d, D3d | — |
I | 60 | T, D5, D3 | Ih |
Oh | 48 | Td, Th, D4h, D4d, D3d | — |
O | 24 | T, D4, D3 | Oh |
Td | 24 | T, D2d, C3v | Oh |
Th | 24 | T, D2h, S6 | Oh, Ih |
T | 12 | D2, C3 | Td, Th, O, I |
Dnh | 4n | Dn, Cnh | Dmnh |
Dnd | 4n | Dn, Cnv, S2n | Dmnd |
and so on. —Tamfang 01:07, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Sure, that seems like a reasonable and useful summary of the various relationships among the groups.