Are circular symmetry and cyclic symmetry the same thing? [on hold]
The title says it all. I was just wondering if they are synonymous.
Are 'circular symmetry' and 'cyclic symmetry' synonymous?
terminology
asked 2 days ago
EulerSpoilerEulerSpoiler
729
put on hold as unclear what you're asking by Matt Samuel, Paul Frost, Shailesh, KReiser, mrtaurho 2 days ago
Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
add a comment |
The title says it all. I was just wondering if they are synonymous.
Are 'circular symmetry' and 'cyclic symmetry' synonymous?
terminology
asked 2 days ago
EulerSpoilerEulerSpoiler
729
put on hold as unclear what you're asking by Matt Samuel, Paul Frost, Shailesh, KReiser, mrtaurho 2 days ago
Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
1
In what context(s)? Without context, I read "circular symmetry" as geometric, referencing the continuous symmetry group of the circle; and "cyclic symmetry" as algebraic (and/or discrete), indicating, for example, that the value of an expression in $x$, $y$, $z$ is unchanged under the substitutions $xto yto z to x$. That said, if someone used "cyclic symmetry" to describe circles, or "circular symmetry" to describe such substitutions, I'm pretty sure I'd know what they meant.
– Blue
2 days ago
@Blue: Thank you for that perspective. It is precisely a heavy-hitter instance of the cross-over case that got me wondering, namely, the use of “order-five cyclic symmetry” in a Wikipedia article on a geometric topic, namely, the one on the Cremona-Richmond configuration: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cremona%E2%80%93Richmond_configuration
– EulerSpoiler
2 days ago
You should include this context in the body of the question itself, instead of in the comments (that not everyone reads). Moreover, you should quote whatever passage(s) sparked the question. Make the reader work as little as possible to understand your question and to provide you a relevant answer.
– Blue
2 days ago
add a comment |
The title says it all. I was just wondering if they are synonymous.
Are 'circular symmetry' and 'cyclic symmetry' synonymous?
terminology
asked 2 days ago
EulerSpoilerEulerSpoiler
729
The title says it all. I was just wondering if they are synonymous.
Are 'circular symmetry' and 'cyclic symmetry' synonymous?
terminology
terminology
asked 2 days ago
EulerSpoilerEulerSpoiler
729
asked 2 days ago
EulerSpoilerEulerSpoiler
729
asked 2 days ago
EulerSpoilerEulerSpoiler
729
asked 2 days ago
EulerSpoilerEulerSpoiler
729
asked 2 days ago
EulerSpoilerEulerSpoiler
729
729
put on hold as unclear what you're asking by Matt Samuel, Paul Frost, Shailesh, KReiser, mrtaurho 2 days ago
Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
put on hold as unclear what you're asking by Matt Samuel, Paul Frost, Shailesh, KReiser, mrtaurho 2 days ago
Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
1
In what context(s)? Without context, I read "circular symmetry" as geometric, referencing the continuous symmetry group of the circle; and "cyclic symmetry" as algebraic (and/or discrete), indicating, for example, that the value of an expression in $x$, $y$, $z$ is unchanged under the substitutions $xto yto z to x$. That said, if someone used "cyclic symmetry" to describe circles, or "circular symmetry" to describe such substitutions, I'm pretty sure I'd know what they meant.
– Blue
2 days ago
@Blue: Thank you for that perspective. It is precisely a heavy-hitter instance of the cross-over case that got me wondering, namely, the use of “order-five cyclic symmetry” in a Wikipedia article on a geometric topic, namely, the one on the Cremona-Richmond configuration: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cremona%E2%80%93Richmond_configuration
– EulerSpoiler
2 days ago
You should include this context in the body of the question itself, instead of in the comments (that not everyone reads). Moreover, you should quote whatever passage(s) sparked the question. Make the reader work as little as possible to understand your question and to provide you a relevant answer.
– Blue
2 days ago
add a comment |
1
In what context(s)? Without context, I read "circular symmetry" as geometric, referencing the continuous symmetry group of the circle; and "cyclic symmetry" as algebraic (and/or discrete), indicating, for example, that the value of an expression in $x$, $y$, $z$ is unchanged under the substitutions $xto yto z to x$. That said, if someone used "cyclic symmetry" to describe circles, or "circular symmetry" to describe such substitutions, I'm pretty sure I'd know what they meant.
– Blue
2 days ago
@Blue: Thank you for that perspective. It is precisely a heavy-hitter instance of the cross-over case that got me wondering, namely, the use of “order-five cyclic symmetry” in a Wikipedia article on a geometric topic, namely, the one on the Cremona-Richmond configuration: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cremona%E2%80%93Richmond_configuration
– EulerSpoiler
2 days ago
You should include this context in the body of the question itself, instead of in the comments (that not everyone reads). Moreover, you should quote whatever passage(s) sparked the question. Make the reader work as little as possible to understand your question and to provide you a relevant answer.
– Blue
2 days ago
1
1
In what context(s)? Without context, I read "circular symmetry" as geometric, referencing the continuous symmetry group of the circle; and "cyclic symmetry" as algebraic (and/or discrete), indicating, for example, that the value of an expression in $x$, $y$, $z$ is unchanged under the substitutions $xto yto z to x$. That said, if someone used "cyclic symmetry" to describe circles, or "circular symmetry" to describe such substitutions, I'm pretty sure I'd know what they meant.
– Blue
2 days ago
In what context(s)? Without context, I read "circular symmetry" as geometric, referencing the continuous symmetry group of the circle; and "cyclic symmetry" as algebraic (and/or discrete), indicating, for example, that the value of an expression in $x$, $y$, $z$ is unchanged under the substitutions $xto yto z to x$. That said, if someone used "cyclic symmetry" to describe circles, or "circular symmetry" to describe such substitutions, I'm pretty sure I'd know what they meant.
– Blue
2 days ago
@Blue: Thank you for that perspective. It is precisely a heavy-hitter instance of the cross-over case that got me wondering, namely, the use of “order-five cyclic symmetry” in a Wikipedia article on a geometric topic, namely, the one on the Cremona-Richmond configuration: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cremona%E2%80%93Richmond_configuration
– EulerSpoiler
2 days ago
@Blue: Thank you for that perspective. It is precisely a heavy-hitter instance of the cross-over case that got me wondering, namely, the use of “order-five cyclic symmetry” in a Wikipedia article on a geometric topic, namely, the one on the Cremona-Richmond configuration: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cremona%E2%80%93Richmond_configuration
– EulerSpoiler
2 days ago
You should include this context in the body of the question itself, instead of in the comments (that not everyone reads). Moreover, you should quote whatever passage(s) sparked the question. Make the reader work as little as possible to understand your question and to provide you a relevant answer.
– Blue
2 days ago
You should include this context in the body of the question itself, instead of in the comments (that not everyone reads). Moreover, you should quote whatever passage(s) sparked the question. Make the reader work as little as possible to understand your question and to provide you a relevant answer.
– Blue
2 days ago
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
1
In what context(s)? Without context, I read "circular symmetry" as geometric, referencing the continuous symmetry group of the circle; and "cyclic symmetry" as algebraic (and/or discrete), indicating, for example, that the value of an expression in $x$, $y$, $z$ is unchanged under the substitutions $xto yto z to x$. That said, if someone used "cyclic symmetry" to describe circles, or "circular symmetry" to describe such substitutions, I'm pretty sure I'd know what they meant.
– Blue
2 days ago
@Blue: Thank you for that perspective. It is precisely a heavy-hitter instance of the cross-over case that got me wondering, namely, the use of “order-five cyclic symmetry” in a Wikipedia article on a geometric topic, namely, the one on the Cremona-Richmond configuration: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cremona%E2%80%93Richmond_configuration
– EulerSpoiler
2 days ago
You should include this context in the body of the question itself, instead of in the comments (that not everyone reads). Moreover, you should quote whatever passage(s) sparked the question. Make the reader work as little as possible to understand your question and to provide you a relevant answer.
– Blue
2 days ago