Talk:Crystallography/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

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)

Exactly what I was thinking so I looked at this talk page. But it is now more than six years later, and no one has done it yet. I suppose the list "Scientists of note" is a first step, but we need some information about them. Perhaps someone could go through the articles about these scientists, collect their contributions to crystallography and put them in order in a history section for this article. Or perhaps someone has a book about the history which can be used as a source. Dirac66 (talk) 02:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Exactly what I was looking for now, someone should write a history section.--Iagocasabiell (talk) 16:53, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Exactly my thoughts almost 2 years later. I've gathered some material on this for a lecture course so I'll try to get it added soon Moiré metallique (talk) 02:26, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

All these Wikilinks, plus the "Scientist of note" ones, should go into a new infobar template, which can be used with all the crystallography-related articles. Reify-tech (talk) 17:30, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

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)

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)

Victor Rothschild

i seem to recollect that he had a key role in the initial application of crystallography to biology? is this right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.106.121.219 (talk) 22:36, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Image for article

File:X2SwithLogoMarch2008.jpg

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)

Faces or Facets?

"Before the development of X-ray diffraction crystallography (see below), the study of crystals was based on their geometry. This involves measuring the angles of crystal faces relative to theoretical reference axes..." I think "faces" should be replaced by "facets" here. Can anyone confirm? --Steve (talk) 03:07, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Both are correct, but faces is more common in science literature (face centered cubic; try Googling "crystal faces" and "crystal facets"). Materialscientist (talk) 03:21, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Ah, you're right, thanks! :-) --Steve (talk) 08:00, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

face centred cubic lattice

The figure illustrating face centred cubic lattice cannot be correct. It shows three mutually orthogonal close packed directions (directions along which the balls touch). This is not possible in an fcc lattice where at most only two orthogonal close packed directions can be found (along the face diagonal of the cube). the solid which has close packed directions as its edges in an fcc lattice is an octahedron. Deviuma (talk) 08:29, 27 May 2012 (UTC)deviuma

removed the fcc picture

that picture was wrongly placed. it was primitive cubic and not face centered cubic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.198.20.6 (talk) 15:37, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Metal Organic Framework Crystalline Sponge method

I was looking for information on this new method. Anybody up to including a bit of info on it?216.96.76.190 (talk) 08:25, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Merger with Crystal Structure?

The two terms are closely related and the subject matter and content are overlapping and highly redundant. The article on crystal structure is now much more comprehensive, but ideally I would prefer to have the information here under "Crystallography", particularly as 2014 is going to be the International Year of Crystallography (http://www.iycr2014.org/).Martino3 (talk) 17:42, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

The article here should focus on the science and profession, its methods and equipment, and its relationship to other fields of study. Detailed information about crystal groups and such should go ito crystal structure, which is already a high-quality article. Reify-tech (talk) 17:30, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Crystallography is also a formal science

The first paragraph of this article currently says plainly that Crystallography is an experimental science. However, there have been great strides in mathematics studying lattices [Lattice (group), Crystallographic restriction theorem , etc.] and quasicrystals, enough so that I would solidly claim crystallography to have a legitimate formal component. I have not made any changes to the article at this time. 104.228.101.152 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:47, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Rosalind Franklin

Thought I might mention, as I saw Rosalind Franklin's name on the list of notable crystallographers, that Rosalind Franklin did not have a degree in crystallography, nor did she officially study it. Jaques Mering just taught her some things about it. She in fact, insisted that she was NOT a crystallographer, but merely someone who had some amount of exposure to crystallography. 98.217.230.157 (talk) 20:43, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Crystallography. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 03:57, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Crystallography/Archive_1&oldid=1213335615"