Talk:Anisotropy

This article was nominated for deletion on May 31, 2005. The result of the discussion was keep.

Physics Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Measurement (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Measurement, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.MeasurementWikipedia:WikiProject MeasurementTemplate:WikiProject MeasurementMeasurement articles

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Anisotropic liquid was copied or moved into Anisotropy#Physics with this edit on 17:15, 20 November 2013. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 February 2020 and 8 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lingzilong.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Pronunciation: an.IS.o.trop.y, right? stress on second sylable... 68.107.83.19 01:58, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

nope --Numsgil 04:12, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that's what happens when you have a five-syllable word. Sure doesn't seem right, though.... 24.6.66.193 (talk) 15:15, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

YES! OF COURSE IT'S RIGHT! Honestly, what kind of pedantic dimwit is trying to train people to pronounce it how they do?! I'm sorry, it can't stay in the article, it's not a "fact", just an opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.133.197 (talk) 21:53, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't this be combined with isotropic? –radiojon 04:54, 2004 Jun 15 (UTC)

I have no clear opinion... but if it should, shouldn't the merged article be put at isotropy? Fredrik (talk) 09:20, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

You both have way too much time on your hands. Get a hobby...--192.28.2.17 17:51, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia is my hobby :) - Fredrik (talk) 18:04, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

It would be nice to have a visual example of what an Anisotropic Filter (for example, in computer graphics) does exactly. Like the images available at the antialiasing page. --Numsgil 01:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isotropy should point to the correct article, not the disambiguation page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.186.24.99 (talk) 16:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"inc" ??

From the article:

"Some materials conduct heat inc, that is independent of spatial orientation around the heat source."

This sentence stops making sense around "inc, that". I can't decode it well enough to even consider rephrashing it. Anybody?... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.79.100.238 (talk) 11:11, 31 August 2007 (UTC) fail epically even i no that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.225.41 (talk) 13:51, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Examples - wood, polarizer

I appreciate the "wood" example as it contains a succinct explanation of why wood is an anisotropic material (e.g., "is easier to split along the grain than against it"). On the other hand, no explanation is provided as to why "light coming through a polarizer" is an example of anisotropy. I am not commenting on the validity of the assertion and am not competent enough to provide an explanation, but think that the bare statement does not benefit a reader who does not understand anisotropy.--Rpclod (talk) 18:32, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anisotropy. 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/20100303080919/http://aluminium.matter.org.uk:80/content/html/eng/default.asp?catid=99&pageid=1028022659 to http://aluminium.matter.org.uk/content/html/eng/default.asp?catid=99&pageid=1028022659

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 09:52, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]