This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Should we move this page to conformal mapping? (That is now just a redirect page pointing here.) Michael Hardy 23:56, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Why mapping is better than map? Tosha
Is this page consistent in talking about preservation of orientation? Charles Matthews 08:54, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
If 'conformal' means 'preserves angles', then conjugates mobius tranfomations are not conformal - they reverse all the angles.
I have a concern about the example recently added by 69.140.68.72: since one of the major points about a conformal map is that it preserves angles, it seems a pity to use an example which clearly changes an angle ... I don't have sufficient knowledge of applications to suggest an alternative - anyone? Madmath789 17:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
The phrase "conformal equivalence" is employed without giving its definition. Can someone add this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.37.181 ( talk) 22:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm having trouble with the section "Higher-dimensional Euclidean space". Isn't in addition to the types mentioned another conformal map possible? By letting an 2d-conformal map act on two of the dimensions and leaving the component perpendicalur to this plane unchanged? -- Pjacobi ( talk) 14:36, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
I like pictures in this article made by Christian.Mercat, which were removed by anonimus user. Should I revert this edit ? -- Adam majewski ( talk) 09:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Please consider putting them somewhere else! They are nice but don't look serious enough for an encyclopedia article. --Anonymous
The transform of a solution of the Laplace equation again is a solution only in two dimensions. In general the transform must be multiplied with s-(d-2)/2 to get a solution, where s is the local scale factor. This shouldn't be swept under the carpet. radical_in_all_things ( talk) 16:40, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
I noticed this too. I have reworded a little, now at least the paragraph doesn't make a false claim. Of course, it could use some editing explaining why we are resticting to two dimensions and what is necessary to do in higher dimension Otherwise one might wonder why bother with conformal maps in higher dimension in the first place. -- Giuseppe Negro ( talk) 14:27, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
In the "uses" section of this article, somebody has mentioned the (quite true) fact that conformal transformations are important in general relativity. However, they've then gone and spoiled things by claiming that this is somehow related to the existence of a "force"; moreover, they claim that conformal transformations are used somehow to make general relativity describe the state of the universe before the big bang.
Needless to say, both of these things are manifestly false. If nobody has any objection, I'd like to remove them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.31.22.37 ( talk) 22:30, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Conformal map. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:32, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
An archived version with functional formulas may be replaced in External links. — Rgdboer ( talk) 02:59, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Conformal map. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.math.univ-montp2.fr/SPIP/IMG/jar/ComplexMapStill.jarWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:00, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
The following was removed but may be useful for § Complex analysis:
The contributor inserted these dictionary citations in the section dealing with alternative angles, now § Pseudo-Riemannian geometry. — Rgdboer ( talk) 01:09, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
This section is not sourced. It uses concepts that are not defined here nor in linked articles. Some of these concepts are even nonsensical, such as "any [Jacobiam matrix with non-zero determinant] lies in a particular planar commutative subring and has a polar decomposition determined by parameters of radial and angular nature".
It seems that this section has been written by a fan of the old-fashioned terminology of split complex numbers, dual numbers and other hypercomplex numbers, who do not really understand the subject of the article.
A section on (pseudo)-conformal maps in Pseudo-Riemanian geometry would be useful here, if based on reliable sources. This gibberish is of no help for writing such a section.
So, I'll delete this section per WP:TNT. D.Lazard ( talk) 11:04, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
It would help at least one definition from many equivalent ones of conformality is given for Rn to Rn maps for all n. 213.28.228.243 ( talk) 15:16, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Let and be open subsets of . A function is called conformal (or angle-preserving) at a point if it preserves angles between directed curves through , as well as preserving orientation.
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Should we move this page to conformal mapping? (That is now just a redirect page pointing here.) Michael Hardy 23:56, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Why mapping is better than map? Tosha
Is this page consistent in talking about preservation of orientation? Charles Matthews 08:54, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
If 'conformal' means 'preserves angles', then conjugates mobius tranfomations are not conformal - they reverse all the angles.
I have a concern about the example recently added by 69.140.68.72: since one of the major points about a conformal map is that it preserves angles, it seems a pity to use an example which clearly changes an angle ... I don't have sufficient knowledge of applications to suggest an alternative - anyone? Madmath789 17:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
The phrase "conformal equivalence" is employed without giving its definition. Can someone add this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.37.181 ( talk) 22:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm having trouble with the section "Higher-dimensional Euclidean space". Isn't in addition to the types mentioned another conformal map possible? By letting an 2d-conformal map act on two of the dimensions and leaving the component perpendicalur to this plane unchanged? -- Pjacobi ( talk) 14:36, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
I like pictures in this article made by Christian.Mercat, which were removed by anonimus user. Should I revert this edit ? -- Adam majewski ( talk) 09:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Please consider putting them somewhere else! They are nice but don't look serious enough for an encyclopedia article. --Anonymous
The transform of a solution of the Laplace equation again is a solution only in two dimensions. In general the transform must be multiplied with s-(d-2)/2 to get a solution, where s is the local scale factor. This shouldn't be swept under the carpet. radical_in_all_things ( talk) 16:40, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
I noticed this too. I have reworded a little, now at least the paragraph doesn't make a false claim. Of course, it could use some editing explaining why we are resticting to two dimensions and what is necessary to do in higher dimension Otherwise one might wonder why bother with conformal maps in higher dimension in the first place. -- Giuseppe Negro ( talk) 14:27, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
In the "uses" section of this article, somebody has mentioned the (quite true) fact that conformal transformations are important in general relativity. However, they've then gone and spoiled things by claiming that this is somehow related to the existence of a "force"; moreover, they claim that conformal transformations are used somehow to make general relativity describe the state of the universe before the big bang.
Needless to say, both of these things are manifestly false. If nobody has any objection, I'd like to remove them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.31.22.37 ( talk) 22:30, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Conformal map. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:32, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
An archived version with functional formulas may be replaced in External links. — Rgdboer ( talk) 02:59, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Conformal map. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.math.univ-montp2.fr/SPIP/IMG/jar/ComplexMapStill.jarWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:00, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
The following was removed but may be useful for § Complex analysis:
The contributor inserted these dictionary citations in the section dealing with alternative angles, now § Pseudo-Riemannian geometry. — Rgdboer ( talk) 01:09, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
This section is not sourced. It uses concepts that are not defined here nor in linked articles. Some of these concepts are even nonsensical, such as "any [Jacobiam matrix with non-zero determinant] lies in a particular planar commutative subring and has a polar decomposition determined by parameters of radial and angular nature".
It seems that this section has been written by a fan of the old-fashioned terminology of split complex numbers, dual numbers and other hypercomplex numbers, who do not really understand the subject of the article.
A section on (pseudo)-conformal maps in Pseudo-Riemanian geometry would be useful here, if based on reliable sources. This gibberish is of no help for writing such a section.
So, I'll delete this section per WP:TNT. D.Lazard ( talk) 11:04, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
It would help at least one definition from many equivalent ones of conformality is given for Rn to Rn maps for all n. 213.28.228.243 ( talk) 15:16, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Let and be open subsets of . A function is called conformal (or angle-preserving) at a point if it preserves angles between directed curves through , as well as preserving orientation.