Talk:Toroid

Topology and... Patents?!

Why is it that there are two US patent links in a topology article?--189.101.47.206 (talk) 03:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

I see no reason to have them here. I don't see how they relate to the topic. --Ronz (talk) 16:50, 22 October 2009 (UTC)Reply


Idea for expansion

Perhaps someone could write in about how to calculate the volume of a toroid? - i.e. Using the formula for a solid of revolution? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_of_revolution — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomthecool (talkcontribs) 20:49, 5 April 2011 (UTC)Reply


Conflicting definition?

This article says that a toroid is like a torus except that it is created by rotating any shape around an axis, while a torus is a special case where the rotated shape is a circle. The Torus page, as well as the Toroid_(disambiguation) page, both state that a toroid is the solid bounded by a torus (ie that a torus is the surface of a toroid). From looking around on the internet I can't tell for sure whether there are two different meanings of the word or just a lot of incorrect assumptions. Is one of these definitions incorrect or are there two accepted meanings for Toroid? MichaelBoon (talk) 21:29, 16 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Propose redirecting to surface of revolution

Does this article really stand up? There is a disambig page for the adjective Toroidal, with circular linking between it and Toroid (disambiguation). Outside of Stewart's toroidal polyhedra, which Stewart calls toroids, any higher-genus manifold is described by mathematicians as a torus and I can find no suggestion that a toroid is anything other than a particular class of a surface of revolution.

I do not think there can ever be enough material to sustain this page as a standalone article. It needs to be merged into its primary article and redirected. The obvious first choice might be torus, but I think that surface of revolution is more accurate. Does anybody have any objections? — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 13:02, 22 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

30 tet ring in 600-cell
surface of revolution is very unspecific compared to toroid. A toroid is a body, I would not search for it under any surface. Ra-raisch (talk) 15:05, 23 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Bad writing

The second paragraph of the article is as follows:

"'The term toroid is also used to describe a toroidal polyhedron. In this context a toroid need not be circular and may have any number of holes. A g-holed toroid can be seen as approximating the surface of a torus having a topological genus, g, of 1 or greater. The Euler characteristic χ of a g holed toroid is 2(1-g)."

It is unfortunate that the word "toroid" is defined in this case in terms that use the word "toroidal" in them. Nobody knows what a "toroidal polyhedron" is.

Also, nobody has the vaguest idea what kinds of holes are referred to in the statement:

"In this context a toroid need not be circular and may have any number of holes."

It is also completely unclear what the word "approximating" means in the next sentence:

"A g-holed toroid can be seen as approximating the surface of a torus having a topological genus, g, of 1 or greater."

Also, the word "torus" in this last sentence is used erroneously.

In short, the writing is so bad that nobody reading this will have any idea of what it means. 2601:200:C000:1A0:A102:CA1D:93C6:F190 (talk) 21:21, 15 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Bad writing 2

The torus is an example of a toroid, which is the surface of a doughnut. Doughnuts are an example of a solid torus created by rotating a disk, and are not toroids.

This makes no sense: a doughnut is a torus which is a toroid, but a doughnut is not a toroid. Hmmm ... ~2026-63632-9 (talk) 06:09, 29 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

the surface of a body ≠ the body —Antonissimo (talk) 03:14, 31 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.