Talk:Ammann–Beenker tiling
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
How long are the sides of the tiles?[edit]
Especially the "Ammann 4" tiles looks simple. The lengths of the sides can surely be computed with some mathmatics, but it would be nice if they are given in a simple drawing. :-) --RokerHRO (talk) 11:14, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
External links modified[edit]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ammann–Beenker tiling. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070617213815/http://www.itap.physik.uni-stuttgart.de/~gaehler/papers/octcluster.pdf to http://www.itap.physik.uni-stuttgart.de/~gaehler/papers/octcluster.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:24, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
Strange statement[edit]
I tagged the statement "Because all tilings obtained with the tiles are non-periodic, Ammann–Beenker tilings are considered aperiodic tilings" in the lead section for needing a citation, because I think this is a very strange statement. If an Ammann-Beenker tiling is created via the cut-and-project method without matching rules, then the tiles in the resulting tiling will be unmarked and thus not aperiodic tiles because there are periodic tilings that can be created with the unmarked tiles. But that tiling would still be an Ammann-Beenker tiling (since it is identical to a tiling obtainable from the aperiodic AB tiles with matching rules), right? Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 18:22, 14 April 2020 (UTC)