16
$\begingroup$

I zoomed into the logo in the top left on my iPhone and noticed an asymmetry. Now you will see it too:

enter image description here

Here it is on my macbook (and also demonstrating the same issue on Math Meta)

enter image description here

The improperly matching faces are noticable (if you go looking) at standard zoom, and so is the smaller leg of the 6 point star.

I think it was not always asymmetrical. For instance, in this 2019 post, there is the following png file (with transparency, so not a screenshot. Perhaps it is from Design Ideas for Mathematics Site)

enter image description here

which looks symmetrical to me. I've drawn some sloppy quick guidelines-

enter image description here

I certainly could have done a better job, but I think its already clear. Actually, from drawing this I note there's still the $y\mapsto -y$ symmetry in the 6 point star, i.e. there are two short legs. (Also the colours have changed!)

I'm not the only person to have this issue; the edge mismatch and small leg can be seen (some 2 years ago) in some of the screenshots in Mathematics new site theme is live .

But I wonder if everyone sees it? And can it be fixed? I guess I'll tag [bug]? Perhaps this instead should be a [feature-request]?

(December 24th update) I have recreated the logo in Ti$\color{orange}k$Z. Maybe its only $(100-\epsilon)$% perfect but it took me only an hour, I'm sure an experienced designer could easily fix our current logo in less. A comparison between mine(left) and the original by the designer(right): enter image description here and here is a higher res version of mine. Of course, with the code, we can change the colours (only for fun, say sticking on a tree! not a lawyer etc...) Merry Xmas everyone :) enter image description here

Full source:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{tikz}
\begin{document}

\newcommand{\centeroffset}[1]{1.65}
\definecolor{colorA}{RGB}{191,21,27}
\definecolor{colorB}{RGB}{208,24,31}
\definecolor{colorC}{RGB}{146,6,8}

\newcommand{\face}[2]{
\draw[rotate=#1,fill=#2,line width=0] 
    (0:0)
    --(30:1)
    -- ++(0,-1) 
    -- ++(210:1)
    -- ++ (0,1);
    }
\newcommand{\redcube}[1]{
\begin{scope}[#1]
\face{0}{colorA}
\face{120}{colorB}
\face{240}{colorC}
\end{scope}
}

\newcommand{\redcubeA}[1]{
\begin{scope}[#1]
\face{0}{colorA}
%\face{120}{colorB}
%\face{240}{colorC}
\end{scope}
}

\newcommand{\redcubeB}[1]{
\begin{scope}[#1]
%\face{0}{colorA}
\face{120}{colorB}
%\face{240}{colorC}
\end{scope}
}

\newcommand{\redcubeC}[1]{
\begin{scope}[#1]
%\face{0}{colorA}
%\face{120}{colorB}
\face{240}{colorC}
\end{scope}
}

\newcommand{\redcubeAc}[1]{
\begin{scope}[#1]
%\face{0}{colorA}
\face{120}{colorB}
\face{240}{colorC}
\end{scope}
}

\newcommand{\redcubeBc}[1]{
\begin{scope}[#1]
\face{0}{colorA}
%\face{120}{colorB}
\face{240}{colorC}
\end{scope}
}

\newcommand{\redcubeCc}[1]{
\begin{scope}[#1]
\face{0}{colorA}
\face{120}{colorB}
%\face{240}{colorC}
\end{scope}
}

\begin{tikzpicture}

\redcubeC{shift={(330:\centeroffset{})}}
\redcubeAc{shift={(270:\centeroffset{})}}
\redcubeB{shift={(210:\centeroffset{})}}
\redcubeCc{shift={(150:\centeroffset{})}}
\redcubeA{shift={(90:\centeroffset{})}}
\redcubeBc{shift={(30:\centeroffset{})}}

\redcubeB{shift={(30:\centeroffset{})}}
\redcubeAc{shift={(90:\centeroffset{})}}
\redcubeC{shift={(150:\centeroffset{})}}
\redcubeBc{shift={(210:\centeroffset{})}}
\redcubeA{shift={(270:\centeroffset{})}}
\redcubeCc{shift={(330:\centeroffset{})}}
\end{tikzpicture}

\end{document}
$\endgroup$
6
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I have this too. $\endgroup$ – KReiser Dec 18 '20 at 8:02
  • $\begingroup$ Tag discussion would be better: this the logo chosen for the site. Where's the bug? $\endgroup$ – Peter Phipps Dec 18 '20 at 9:06
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @PeterPhipps it seems that (as in this post by the designer) it used to be symmetrical. Now it is not. The logo that was originally chosen has changed (in shape). One of the reasons the Penrose triangle (a motivation for the logo) is striking visually is due to its symmetry. I find it unlikely that a designer would put asymmetry in it on purpose. And lets not talk about if I get a [status-by-design] tag... $\endgroup$ – Calvin Khor Dec 18 '20 at 9:25
  • $\begingroup$ I stand corrected. $\endgroup$ – Peter Phipps Dec 18 '20 at 9:38
  • $\begingroup$ I'll update in the comments this time, but there's something weird going on: right-click > save on the logo as presented to us gives an *.svg that is imperfect. But the file found by quid in this Math Meta link has a perfectly rendered logo in the sprite sheet! $\endgroup$ – Calvin Khor Dec 26 '20 at 7:05
  • $\begingroup$ Very insightful observation. And yes this should be fixed. This needs the status-review or status-planned tag $\endgroup$ – Verónica Rmz. Mar 13 at 3:23

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .