This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've removed the redirect and started a new article. This needs a bit of more work, please feel free to edit (although I think the mathematical formalism should be kept to a minimum). O. Prytz 22:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
The "sub-captions" within the 2D figure are misleading in their use of the ≠ symbol. In 2 and 3 (rect and centred rect) |a1|≠|a2| indicates |a1| is unequal to |a2|. In 1 (oblique) |a1|≠|a2| instead indicates that there is not necessarily equality. /toen — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.191.182.83 ( talk) 19:12, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunately all of the diagrams showing three angles here are wrong. The angle gamma as shown can be calculated from the angle alpha since they are both part of the same quadrilateral, whose angles must sum to 180 degrees. New diagrams with the angles in the correct places are needed. -- Chymicus 19:33, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Another error of note: in the pictures representing the 5 different 2-d lattices the lattice vectors shown for the "centered rectangular" lattice appear to be in error.--adam 02:40ish, May 26, 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.52.100 ( talk) 09:43, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
I can spot diagram error for Monoclinic, its gamma angle that should be different. I am comparing this to Ashcroft-Merbin Solid state physics book, page 118. Spiralciric ( talk) 13:12, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
This article has one of the most deficient definitions among all mathematics articles. There are 14 Bravais lattices in what sense? In other words, what makes two Bravais lattices equivalent? Without this information, the article may as well be chicken scratchings. Daqu 15:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Furthermore, the description of the different kinds of Bravais lattices makes great use of the word cell without once mentioning what cell is being discussed.
Lastly, please note the the expression "a ≠ b ≠ c", used repeatedly in describing various diagrams, does not exclude the possibility a = c. Daqu 16:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
The monoclonic lattices have different symmetry groups depending on whether a and b are equal or not: in the former case the symmetry group contains a reflection permuting the two lattice basis vectors, therefore, there are really six types. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.236.109.227 ( talk) 11:37, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
I've replaced images for Monoclinic lattices from Monoclinic.svg to Monoclinic.png / Monoclinic-base-centered.svg to Monoclinic-base-centered.png. Maybe the png version of these are more correct in the description of their angles. -- Anonymous
Actually, all the monoclinic crystal diagrams are incorrect, since they should show beta ≠ 90°, rather than alpha. See talk page for Crystal system. Wolf.aarons ( talk) 17:26, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
`wat are the proceedure to take wen calc the lattice point of an atom . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.78.17.114 ( talk) 14:53, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
I know Ashcroft and Mermin use this definition, but really it is not right. Bravais refers to lattice *types*. What is defined here is simply a lattice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.66.134 ( talk) 20:18, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Can someone explain to a physics student, why there are only 14 bravai lattices? I dont understand what constrains the number of possible lattice types? I have seen pictures that explained to me, why no pentagons or heptagons can fill the 2D space... It must have something to do with that. But then I don't understand why there are face-centered or body-centered lattice types. What is the difference of a sc lattice and a bcc lattice. I could use the sc lattice and 2 atomic basis or not? -- 85.178.145.181 ( talk) 17:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
"In zero-dimensional and one-dimensional space, there is only one type of Bravais lattice."
Is it helpful or meaningful to mention zero-dimensional space in this sentence at all? The intended meaning appears to be that the single point is the only possible "lattice" in zero dimensions, but I'm not entirely convinced that that qualifies as a lattice. -- SoledadKabocha ( talk) 04:12, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bravais lattice. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:06, 24 July 2017 (UTC)