| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Spinor article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 14 days  |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
‹See TfM›
| |||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg?lang=en){kind=small}
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
|
|||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Problem with article
editI find that there are a very, very large number of words that one must read through before getting to the definition of what a spinor is.
But then, when we finally arrive at the "formal mathematical definition", we are told that the "space of spinors" is the "fundamental representation of the Clifford algebra".
Which Clifford algebra? We are not told. And What is a spinor? We are still not told.
This is exasperating to anyone trying to understand what "a spinor" means. 2601:200:C000:1A0:BD2E:1150:73B7:AF9B (talk) 18:36, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- The above comment is correct and still applicable in 2024. Jess_Riedel (talk) 22:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- I've added a See also link to spinors in three dimensions just below the formal mathematical definition section. This other article has an easy to follow explanation of what a spinor is. I hope that helps. Schweinchen (talk) 21:23, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
consistency of font
editI have made this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spinor&type=revision&diff=1112165710&oldid=1102973222 edit. I think I have not made any mistake in doing so, but if I have, then please correct it. But please do not undo my edit without considering the following.
The reason for my edit is that the current version of the article uses three different font formats, and this makes it hard for the reader, even if it makes it easier for the editor. I submit that ease for the reader should be decisive. Please consider this carefully.
A maxim here is 'every second that a writer saves in short-cut writing costs the reader five minutes to work out the proper reading'.
The font consistency work that I have started in that edit should be progressed throughout the article.Chjoaygame (talk) 00:45, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Spinor classification
editHello, Would it be appropriate to include a section on spinor classification in this article? An alternative approach would be to have a separate article on spinor classification as this article is a lengthy article. I could write the section or article if needed.TMM53 (talk) 03:20, 8 March 2024 (UTC)