User talk:Geek3/Archives/2013

Sphere_wireframe image usage under CC BY 3.0 for startup company logo

Dear Geek3,

We would like to use a modified copy of your Sphere_wireframe image (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sphere_wireframe_10deg_6r.svg or https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sphere_wireframe_10deg_6r_black.svg) and incorporate it as part of the logo of our new technology startup.

How can we fullfil CC BY 3.0 "attribution requirement" for this particular image usage? Would it be enough to incorporate a reference/attribution in the "legal notice" section of our website to attribute your work?

We can not find any other practical way to incorporate a reference on every document/item/web page (logo will be present in virtually every printed or electronic material produced by the company).

Would you like to consider this special permission?

Thanks in advance,

According to the license I can specify the way in which the attribution has to be made. In your case it is perfectly sufficient to me if the attribution is stated in the "legal notice" section of your official website (or a logo section if existing) and not at every usage of the graphic. Furthermore as in how to shape the attribution you can simply follow the official Commons advices.

One more hint: If you want to adjust the color to your needs there is the possibility to simply change the svg sourcecode at a few places. Geek3 (talk) 18:47, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Chi Square pdf

Hi there, it looks like your chi square pdf plot is showing the cdf, not the pdf, could that be true? Sorry if I missed anything!

Thanks a lot for this hint! I checked and it turns out that user:Niceoboe has replaced the file content. File:Chi-square_pdf.svg used to show the pdf, now it's changed to the cdf. I will fix that again. Geek3 (talk) 08:39, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Sphere filled blue.svg

Did you make the model in a 3D program?

I am trying to make one in Sketchup and have not been successful yet.

I didn't use a 3D program, the figure was programmed from scratch in C. I'd recommend you to use a template from my ImageScripting page. The rest is high-school vector geometry. Geek3 (talk) 10:41, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

PythonVectorFieldPlot

Hi,

thx for the tremendous work. I want to draw my own fieldplots but i got a lots errors.

I appended the source from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Geek3/VectorFieldPlot your given example

doc = FieldplotDocument('VFPt charges plus minus', width=800, height=600, unit=100) field = Field({'monopoles':[ [-1, 0, 1] ]}) field.add_element('monopoles', [1.5, 0, -1]) line = FieldLine(field, [-1, 0], start_v=[0, 1], directions='forward') doc.draw_line(line) doc.draw_charges(field) doc.write()

But i got lots of errors, beginning with line = .... and the last message is ValueError: cannot slice a 0-d array. Can you please provide a full functional example from your tremendous examples on https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Created_with_VectorFieldPlot

Greetings

Hi! Thanks for your interest. You are right, the program exits with an error on the given input, because there was a bug on the wiki page with missing brackets in line field.add_element('monopoles', [1.5, 0, -1]).

The program works flawlessly if you append the commands

doc = FieldplotDocument('VFPt charges plus minus', width=800, height=600, unit=100)
field = Field({'monopoles': [[-1, 0, 1]]})
field.add_element('monopoles', [[1.5, 0, -1]])
line = FieldLine(field, [-1, 0], start_v=[0, 1], directions='forward')
doc.draw_line(line)
doc.draw_charges(field)
doc.write()

You will also find the tested working source code on the wiki page of each individual graphic created with the program, for instance VFPt charges plus minus.svg. Geek3 (talk) 22:15, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

a single question

Hi, I'm Solo,

I've been seeing carefully your gallery. it's a very fine work, and I think you already know it. this is why, a few time ago, I included one of your images in my web page including a link to your site to quote the source, though if you preffer that I do it in a more concrete form, please tell me. I write you 'cause I'm looking for some way to get a few plots on some special magnetic interactions (very simple cross-sections) that, with your permission, I would like to include in a web page I'm working yet, but I got no knowledge on computer programming and this is why I'm afraid I'd not be able to manage with your program. since I'm an unknown person for you, I'd not be so dare as to ask you for working for fun, though this is precisely what I'm doing for a very long time! but I don't know what could I do for you in return if you could lend me a hand. may be you could tell me. I don't know if you would want to test your VectorFieldPlot with some new magnetic patterns, though I think it could be a good opportunity to do it. I'm not a wiki user and I work for no public or private company. I'm simply an amateur, that's someone who does what he loves. if you have any question you can find my email in this web page https://sites.google.com/site/thezplusproposal/.

very good work yours!

Hi,

I'm always happy to extend my gallery of plots. Maybe I can create the images you need and you can take them from Wikimedia Commons thereafter. Just let me know what the concrete field configuration is, maybe you have some definitions or formulas?! If you have a 3D configuration you will also have to choose a 2D plane in which to draw. VectorFieldPlot may be well suited for your purposes. Let's see what I can do! Geek3 (talk) 14:38, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Solo again,

a lot of thanks for your answer ! I appreciate your disposition. shortly, this is the subject:

colors: red wire (at left) with clockwise field lines, blue wire (at right) with counterclockwise field lines. important if possible only. it would be much better with orthogonal cross-section. no matter if it has no rounded edges, though it would be really fine. important: internal separation (1 mm) between both wires in every bifilar unit and the same distance for in between each bifilar wire in the regular pattern of 48 bifilar units. other measures and indications shown in a provisional page I've created for you: https://sites.google.com/site/zpairboard/ as no animation is possible, we would need to know the effects generated at, for example, 10.000volts, 18.000volts and 26.000volts (Direct Current) to be able to visualize the progressive sequence for the field lines interaction for each one of the three possibilities (cross-sections only) suggested at the last section of the Board:

1.- single bifilar wire;

2.- eight bifilar wires with a separation of 20mm in between each one of them;

3.- 48 bifilar wires with complete alignment.

do you think your VectorFieldPlot can bear it? if you cannot do it because of any reason, please tell me. don't worry. there's no hurry. I'll be watching your talk page more or less once a week.

I'm new here and I'm afraid I don't manage very well with your talk page yet. this is why I've written a new message. Solo

Dear Solo,

I looked at your problem and here are some remarks. Essentially the field is determined by Maxwell's equations, from which we learn the following:

• There will not be any z-component of the B-Field as there are no currents in the x-y-plane (because B is generated orthogonally to the current).
• The amount of applied voltage or current will not have any effect on the field shape (because the equations are linear).
• Your configuration is essentially a dipole as in File:VFPt_wires_antiparallel.svg. Putting the wires so close together is rather ineffective and will generate a very weak field.
• For numeric calculation the wires can be modeled as infinitely thin, this will make hardly any difference outside the configuration. Here is some VectorFildPlot code that will show you the field configuration. Actual finite-size wires with fancy symbols can be programmed as well, but I thinks it is not worth the additional effort.

# paste this code at the end of VectorFieldPlot 1.3
w, h = 800, 600
doc = FieldplotDocument('VFPt_wirearray', width=w, height=h, unit=100, commons=True)
nx, ny = 8, 6
d_wire = 0.26
d_filamentx, d_filamenty = 0.71, 0.26

field = Field({})
for iy in range(ny):
    for ix in range(nx):
        x0 = (ix + 0.5 - nx / 2.0) * d_filamentx
        y0 = (iy + 0.5 - ny / 2.0) * d_filamenty
        field.add_element('wires',
            [[x0 - d_wire / 2.0, y0, -1], [x0 + d_wire / 2.0, y0, 1]])

doc.draw_currents(field, scale=0.7)

n = 30
for i in range(n):
    alpha = 4.1 * ( (i + 0.5) / n - 0.5)
    x0 = 3.1 * sin(alpha)
    y0 = 0.7 + 1.4 * cos(alpha)
    line = FieldLine(field, [x0, y0], directions='both', maxr=20)
    doc.draw_line(line, linewidth=1, arrows_style={'min_arrows':2, 'dist':5., 'scale':1.8})

for i in range(1, nx):
    x0 = d_filamentx * (i - nx / 2)
    line = FieldLine(field, [x0 - 0.1*d_filamentx, 0], directions='both')
    doc.draw_line(line, linewidth=1)
    line = FieldLine(field, [x0 + 0.1*d_filamentx, 0], directions='both')
    doc.draw_line(line, linewidth=1)
    
doc.write()

Geek3 (talk) 21:59, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

there's something more

Hi Geek3,

Solo again. thanks for your answer. you're completely right in your statements. I didn't tell you the whole story. if you want, have another look at the Board https://sites.google.com/site/zpairboard/ and you'll probably understand why I proposed those simple magnetic interactions. I only wanted to conceal something I've never shared before. no need for calculation.

Dear Solo,

I took a look at your proposed coil configuration. The produced field can be understood without calculation: Since opposite currents are close together their fields will again cancel to first order and the remaining field will be weak. The configuration can be thought of as two ordinary coils in opposite direction overlapping each other almost completely. The result qualitatively resembles the field of an anti-helmholtz coil (see e.g. google images). There is no field in the center (from symmetry), the field points axially inwards on the symmetry axis from both directions and radially outwards around the center.

If your goal is to trap particles I can tell you there is no static field configuration to do that (physicists would love it and examined it in great detail). For charged particles time-varying fields can be used (Paul trap) and Stellerators are being developed with near perfect trapping properties. For uncharged particles the trick is done for instance by Magneto-optical traps which use a field configuration very much like yours but need additional lasers.

I hope I could help you. If you want to make up for it, contribute to Wikimedia Commons! Geek3 (talk) 23:06, 7 November 2013 (UTC)