Talk:Cyclotruncated tetrahedral-octahedral honeycomb

I propose that this object be renamed "cyclotruncated tetrahedral-octahedral honeycomb" to match the Bowers names of P(n) honeycombs in higher dimenisions, and per this Wikipedia page: Cyclotruncated simplectic honeycomb. Besides, it's not an actual bitruncation of the tetrahedral-octahedral honeycomb. EricABQ (talk) 19:49, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Yeah. Bowers' names are awfully inconsistent with stuff like that. Bowers interprets "rhombicuboctahedron" as "rhombated cuboctahedron" (which is plain wrong), and applies that in higher dimensions, like cellirhombated penteractitriacontaditeron (which is the stericantellated penteract or stericantellated triacontaditeron, but of course not the stericantellated penteractitriacontaditeron ). Another example is the small rhombated demipenteract , which is not the cantellated demipenteract . I recommend ditching the Bowers names altogether tbh. --Galoomba (talk) 20:01, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

> cellirhombated penteractitriacontaditeron

At least when I first heard that name, it was cellirhombipenteractitriacontaditeron. In general, when the suffix mentioned both the base and the dual shape, the operator was attached as a prefix. I saw this convention used in a few places a while ago and I don't know why they stopped using it.

Also, I think names like "batatoh" were invented by someone other than Bowers trying to follow his example. I recall Bowers saying that George Olshevsky made the acronyms for most convex uniform honeycombs. EricABQ (talk) 20:25, 14 May 2021 (UTC)