Talk:Universality class#Merged material from Ising critical exponents

the column "symmetries" of the table has to be rethought. Logically, this column has to refer to the symmetries of the scale-invariant fixed point, not to the symmetries of some particular representative of the universality class (i.e. of the lattice model). The symmetries of the fixed point are larger. So the part "symmetry of the interaction" has to be removed.

I would keep just the internal symmetry of the fixed point in this column. All listed universality classes are rotationally and translationally invariant (and also conformally invariant).

PhysicsAboveAll (talk) 09:02, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

"this dimension is 2d for the Ising model, or for undirected percolation, but 1d for undirected percolation"

This sentence appears contradictory. Lewis Goudy (talk) 22:34, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

I think since the conformal bootstrap, some of the exponents (like 3d ising) are known more accurately? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.17.71.110 (talk) 18:22, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

:Yes, see Ising critical exponents. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 19:56, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

The article Ising critical exponents was put up for deletion, with an eventual consensus against deleting it, but not solid agreement as to what to do beyond that. In order to reduce the number of distinct articles on overlapping topics in this subject area and curtail the fragmentation of the material, I have boldly merged the text of Ising critical exponents into a dedicated section of this article. Now, we can define the notation in one unified place, and we have only one article to fix up, instead of two. (I'd be inclined to split the equilibrium universality classes in the table apart from the dynamic ones like directed percolation, for example.) Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 19:53, 19 June 2025 (UTC)