Talk:Toroid (disambiguation)

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

How many surfaces does a toroid have? One or two? What about extensions to additional spatial dimensions? Does it make sense to talk about the number of surfaces of a 4D toroid? Wgat would a "Mobius toroid" be like? Memenen 14:30, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

this definitely needs to be split into the electromagnetic toroid and the math toroid shape thing!

yeah, like the solenoid page.

Yes, perhaps split into "Toroid (geometry)" and "Toroidal Inductors and Transformers". Both will need work. Also, the main picture is a poor choice--it shows a surface not a solid, and thus belongs under torus not toroid, at least based on the way toroid is defined here. And it's only a torus topologically, not geometrically. Ccrrccrr 04:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be considered trivial if I concluded that the picture's mathematical toroid is the supplement to a Möbius strip? (It is the edge of the strip multiplied by a lesser circle.) -71.159.34.238 20:32, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely agree that electronic and mathematical toroids should be separated into two topics. Mondebleu 01:22, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Mondebleu[reply]

I also think that this should be split into two topics. FyreFiend 15:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I add my agreement to split the geomtrical and electrical meanins. Also, I would like connections to generalizations of the torus in which one of the circles is an ellipse or some other shape. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.98.77.61 (talk) 14:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Punctuation[edit]

Technical documents really should have correct punctuation so the reader can remain focused on the content and its relationship to his purpose rather than having to waste time and suffer needless annoyance having to shift focus and reread improperly-constructed sentences. Of course this particular document is a very short and simple example but the issue becomes very important for larger and/or more complex documents.

In this doc, the example is: "...circular ring shaped magnetic cores." It should be "...circular ring-shaped magnetic cores."

English is a farily illogical language that fails to adhere to its own rules, but in this case a simple rule to help remember when to hyphenate is quite effective:

If the adjectives are inseperable, hyphenate them. In other words, if using the individual adjectives individually changes the meaning, then they need to be hyphenated to indicate that they are to be taken together.

Example: "It's a big brown dog." The adjectives "big" and "brown" are seperable and therefore not hyphenated. Q: Is it a big dog? A: Yes. Q: Is it a brown dog? A: Yes. Two yesses, no hyphen.

Example: "ring shaped magnetic core." Q: Is it a shaped magnetic core? A: Yes (every solid has a shape; of course it's shaped). Q: Is is a ring magentic core? A: Nope. Didn't mean to introduce ring magnetism. One no (or more), needs a hyphen. It's a ring-shaped core.

Cheers.