DOCSLIB.ORG

Convex Polytopes and Tilings with Few Flag Orbits

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Convex Polytopes and Tilings with Few Flag Orbits Convex Polytopes and Tilings with Few Flag Orbits by Nicholas Matteo B.A. in Mathematics, Miami University M.A. in Mathematics, Miami University A dissertation submitted to The Faculty of the College of Science of Northeastern University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy April 14, 2015 Dissertation directed by Egon Schulte Professor of Mathematics Abstract of Dissertation The amount of symmetry possessed by a convex polytope, or a tiling by convex polytopes, is reflected by the number of orbits of its flags under the action of the Euclidean isometries preserving the polytope. The convex polytopes with only one flag orbit have been classified since the work of Schläfli in the 19th century. In this dissertation, convex polytopes with up to three flag orbits are classified. Two-orbit convex polytopes exist only in two or three dimensions, and the only ones whose combinatorial automorphism group is also two-orbit are the cuboctahedron, the icosidodecahedron, the rhombic dodecahedron, and the rhombic triacontahedron. Two-orbit face-to-face tilings by convex polytopes exist on E1, E2, and E3; the only ones which are also combinatorially two-orbit are the trihexagonal plane tiling, the rhombille plane tiling, the tetrahedral-octahedral honeycomb, and the rhombic dodecahedral honeycomb. Moreover, any combinatorially two-orbit convex polytope or tiling is isomorphic to one on the above list. Three-orbit convex polytopes exist in two through eight dimensions. There are infinitely many in three dimensions, including prisms over regular polygons, truncated Platonic solids, and their dual bipyramids and Kleetopes. There are infinitely many in four dimensions, comprising the rectified regular 4-polytopes, the p; p-duoprisms, the bitruncated 4-simplex, the bitruncated 24-cell, and their duals. There are only finitely many other examples, comprising the Gosset polytopes k21 and their duals in five through eight dimensions, and the polytopes k22 and their duals in five or six dimensions. The polygons in the plane with any number k of flag orbits are described. These are pk certain pk-gons, and also certain 2 -gons if k ≥ 4 is even, for any p so that the number of sides is at least three. The resulting flag orbits from various standard operations used to construct new polytopes from others are also discussed. Finally, it is proven that for any k, the polytopes with k flag orbits occur in only finitely many dimensions, and that a certain class of d-dimensional polytopes (including most uniform polytopes) is either regular or has at least d − 1 flag orbits. ii Table of Contents Abstract of Dissertation ii Table of Contents iii List of Figures v List of Tables vii Chapter I. Introduction 1 Chapter II. Orbit Graphs 21 Chapter III. Standard Operations 31 Chapter IV. k-orbit Polygons 59 Chapter V. Two-orbit Polytopes and Tilings 67 Chapter VI. Combinatorially Two-orbit Polytopes and Tilings 87 Chapter VII. Three-orbit Polytopes and Tilings 111 Chapter VIII. Restrictions on k-orbit Polytopes 155 Bibliography 171 iii List of Figures IIa Possible walks on i-edges and j-edges with ji − jj ≥ 2 25 IIb Possible quotients of an (i; i + 1)-walk of 3 steps 27 IIc The lattice of orbit graphs for a quadrilateral 29 IId Example quadrilaterals corresponding to the symmetry types in Figure IIc 30 IIIa The orbit graph of a pyramid over a regular polygon fpg 38 3 IIIb The orbit graph of a pyramid over a cuboctahedron 4 38 IIIc The orbit graph of the product of a regular p-gon P with an isogonal two-orbit q-gon Q, under G(P ) × G(Q) 44 IIId The orbit graph of a prism over a three-orbit polygon 44 IIIe A polyhedron not admitting an extended Kleetope 48 IVa Constructing new line segments above an edge of the regular p-gon Q 62 IVb Constructing new line segments above a point, producing k-gons with k flag orbits 64 IVc Example polygons of the cyclic type 65 Va The first few two-orbit convex polygons, in pairs of duals 68 Vb The two-orbit convex polyhedra 69 Vc A rectangle, overlaid with its midpoint dual and polar dual 73 Vd The fully-transitive rhombus tiling 78 Ve The trihexagonal tiling 79 Vf The 1-intransitive rectangle tiling 81 v Vg The rhombille tiling 81 VIa The Coxeter diagram of a facet-intransitive two-orbit polytope 93 VIb The region R composed of (d − 1)-adjacent chambers, in the case d = 3 (left) or d = 4 (right) 95 VIc Potential Coxeter diagrams for the automorphism group of a two-orbit polytope 96 VId Tiles of An+1 n An. Vertices and edges on the boundary of An+1 are labeled by the number of tiles of An+1 containing them. Elements belonging to An are darkened.106 VIIa Three-orbit polygons with flags colored by orbit 112 VIIb Some three-orbit hexagons 113 VIIc Some polyhedra of type 31;2, with flags colored to match the colored orbit graph 115 VIId The tilings of type 31;2 116 VIIe Some polyhedra of type 30;1, with flags colored to match the colored orbit graph 117 VIIf Three-orbit tilings of type 31 119 VIIIa A partial Kleetope of the cube with an orthodivision but no flag triangulation by orthoschemes. 162 VIIIb The situation of Lemma VIII.7 165 VIIIc The situation of Lemma VIII.9. The shaded triangles remain intact. 166 vi List of Tables Va Two-orbit convex d-polytopes 85 Vb Two-orbit tilings of Ed 85 VIIa Three-orbit convex d-polytopes 152 VIIb Three-orbit tilings of Ed 154 vii CHAPTER I Introduction The amount of symmetry possessed by a convex polytope, or a tiling by convex polytopes, is reflected by the number of orbits of its flags under the action of the Euclidean isometries preserving the polytope. The polytopes with the fewest such orbits are the “most symmetric”. The convex polytopes with only one flag orbit have been classified since the work of Schläfli in the 19th century. In this dissertation, a classification is given for convex polytopes with up to three flag orbits. A description of the polygons in the plane with any number k of flag orbits is also given. The resulting flag orbits from various standard operations used to construct new polytopes from others are also discussed. Finally, it is proven that for any k, the polytopes with k flag orbits occur in only finitely many dimensions, and that a certain class of d-dimensional polytopes (including most uniform polytopes) is either regular or has at least d − 1 flag orbits. A reference to a section in the current chapter appears as §1; a reference to a section in another chapter always includes the chapter number in Roman numerals, such as §II.1. A reference to an item in the current chapter, such as the first lemma in §4, has the form “Lemma 1”. A reference to another chapter, for instance the first proposition in §II.4, has the form “Proposition II.1”. 1. Convex polytopes Convex polytopes and their symmetries are some of the oldest objects of mathematical study. The oldest extant work of axiomatic mathematics, Euclid’s Elements, is concerned with the construction of the Platonic solids (or as we will call them, the one-orbit 3-polytopes). Through the ensuing millennia, highly symmetric figures in the plane or 3-space, and highly symmetric tilings using these as building blocks, have been of enduring interest to artists 1 and mathematicians alike. In the past two centuries, mathematicians have extended the investigation into higher dimensions. Over this time, polytopes have been given many definitions. Here, a convex polytope is the convex hull of finitely many points in d-dimensional Euclidean space Ed (Grünbaum 2003). These are the objects which (in 2 or 3 dimensions) would have been familiar to the ancient Greeks. Throughout this dissertation, the word “polytope” without qualification means “convex polytope.” A d-polytope is one whose affine hull is d-dimensional. Some authors define a (convex) polyhedron as the intersection of finitely many closed half-spaces in Ed, or equivalently, as the solution set to a finite system of linear inequalities: d f x 2 E j Ax ≤ b g; m T where A is an m × d matrix, b 2 E , and for two vectors a = (a1; : : : ; am) and b = T (b1; : : : ; bm) , a ≤ b if and only if ai ≤ bi for each i. This is a convex object, but is not necessarily bounded. These authors define “(con- vex) polytope” to mean a bounded convex polyhedron, or equivalently, a compact convex polyhedron. This is equivalent to our earlier definition. However, we will not use this definition of polyhedron: throughout the sequel, polyhedron means 3-polytope, and polygon means 2-polytope. A (proper) face of a polytope P is the intersection of P with a supporting hyperplane H, i.e. a hyperplane such that H \ P is not empty, and P is contained in one of the closed half-spaces determined by H. In addition to these proper faces, we admit two improper faces: the empty face, ;, and P itself. With the inclusion of these improper faces, the faces of P , ordered by containment, form a lattice: the face lattice of P , denoted L(P ).A j-face is a face whose affine hull is j-dimensional; we call 0-faces vertices, 1-faces edges, (d − 3)-faces subridges, (d − 2)-faces ridges, and (d − 1)-faces facets. The empty face is considered a (−1)-face. Two faces are said to be incident if one contains the other.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 7 LATTICE POINTS and LATTICE POLYTOPES Alexander Barvinok
    7 LATTICE POINTS AND LATTICE POLYTOPES Alexander Barvinok INTRODUCTION Lattice polytopes arise naturally in algebraic geometry, analysis, combinatorics, computer science, number theory, optimization, probability and representation the- ory. They possess a rich structure arising from the interaction of algebraic, convex, analytic, and combinatorial properties. In this chapter, we concentrate on the the- ory of lattice polytopes and only sketch their numerous applications. We briefly discuss their role in optimization and polyhedral combinatorics (Section 7.1). In Section 7.2 we discuss the decision problem, the problem of finding whether a given polytope contains a lattice point. In Section 7.3 we address the counting problem, the problem of counting all lattice points in a given polytope. The asymptotic problem (Section 7.4) explores the behavior of the number of lattice points in a varying polytope (for example, if a dilation is applied to the polytope). Finally, in Section 7.5 we discuss problems with quantifiers. These problems are natural generalizations of the decision and counting problems. Whenever appropriate we address algorithmic issues. For general references in the area of computational complexity/algorithms see [AB09]. We summarize the computational complexity status of our problems in Table 7.0.1. TABLE 7.0.1 Computational complexity of basic problems. PROBLEM NAME BOUNDED DIMENSION UNBOUNDED DIMENSION Decision problem polynomial NP-hard Counting problem polynomial #P-hard Asymptotic problem polynomial #P-hard∗ Problems with quantifiers unknown; polynomial for ∀∃ ∗∗ NP-hard ∗ in bounded codimension, reduces polynomially to volume computation ∗∗ with no quantifier alternation, polynomial time 7.1 INTEGRAL POLYTOPES IN POLYHEDRAL COMBINATORICS We describe some combinatorial and computational properties of integral polytopes.
    [Show full text]
  • Properties of N-Sided Regular Polygons
    PROPERTIES OF N-SIDED REGULAR POLYGONS When students are first exposed to regular polygons in middle school, they learn their properties by looking at individual examples such as the equilateral triangles(n=3), squares(n=4), and hexagons(n=6). A generalization is usually not given, although it would be straight forward to do so with just a min imum of trigonometry and algebra. It also would help students by showing how one obtains generalization in mathematics. We show here how to carry out such a generalization for regular polynomials of side length s. Our starting point is the following schematic of an n sided polygon- We see from the figure that any regular n sided polygon can be constructed by looking at n isosceles triangles whose base angles are θ=(1-2/n)(π/2) since the vertex angle of the triangle is just ψ=2π/n, when expressed in radians. The area of the grey triangle in the above figure is- 2 2 ATr=sh/2=(s/2) tan(θ)=(s/2) tan[(1-2/n)(π/2)] so that the total area of any n sided regular convex polygon will be nATr, , with s again being the side-length. With this generalized form we can construct the following table for some of the better known regular polygons- Name Number of Base Angle, Non-Dimensional 2 sides, n θ=(π/2)(1-2/n) Area, 4nATr/s =tan(θ) Triangle 3 π/6=30º 1/sqrt(3) Square 4 π/4=45º 1 Pentagon 5 3π/10=54º sqrt(15+20φ) Hexagon 6 π/3=60º sqrt(3) Octagon 8 3π/8=67.5º 1+sqrt(2) Decagon 10 2π/5=72º 10sqrt(3+4φ) Dodecagon 12 5π/12=75º 144[2+sqrt(3)] Icosagon 20 9π/20=81º 20[2φ+sqrt(3+4φ)] Here φ=[1+sqrt(5)]/2=1.618033989… is the well known Golden Ratio.
    [Show full text]
  • The Classification and the Conjugacy Classesof the Finite Subgroups of The
    Algebraic & Geometric Topology 8 (2008) 757–785 757 The classification and the conjugacy classes of the finite subgroups of the sphere braid groups DACIBERG LGONÇALVES JOHN GUASCHI Let n 3. We classify the finite groups which are realised as subgroups of the sphere 2 braid group Bn.S /. Such groups must be of cohomological period 2 or 4. Depend- ing on the value of n, we show that the following are the maximal finite subgroups of 2 Bn.S /: Z2.n 1/ ; the dicyclic groups of order 4n and 4.n 2/; the binary tetrahedral group T ; the binary octahedral group O ; and the binary icosahedral group I . We give geometric as well as some explicit algebraic constructions of these groups in 2 Bn.S / and determine the number of conjugacy classes of such finite subgroups. We 2 also reprove Murasugi’s classification of the torsion elements of Bn.S / and explain 2 how the finite subgroups of Bn.S / are related to this classification, as well as to the 2 lower central and derived series of Bn.S /. 20F36; 20F50, 20E45, 57M99 1 Introduction The braid groups Bn of the plane were introduced by E Artin in 1925[2;3]. Braid groups of surfaces were studied by Zariski[41]. They were later generalised by Fox to braid groups of arbitrary topological spaces via the following definition[16]. Let M be a compact, connected surface, and let n N . We denote the set of all ordered 2 n–tuples of distinct points of M , known as the n–th configuration space of M , by: Fn.M / .p1;:::; pn/ pi M and pi pj if i j : D f j 2 ¤ ¤ g Configuration spaces play an important roleˆ in several branches of mathematics and have been extensively studied; see Cohen and Gitler[9] and Fadell and Husseini[14], for example.
    [Show full text]
  • The First Treatments of Regular Star Polygons Seem to Date Back to The
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Archivio istituzionale della ricerca - Università di Palermo FROM THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY TO CABRÌ: CONVOLUTED CONSTRUCTIONS OF STAR POLYGONS INTRODUCTION The first treatments of regular star polygons seem to date back to the fourteenth century, but a comprehensive theory on the subject was presented only in the nineteenth century by the mathematician Louis Poinsot. After showing how star polygons are closely linked to the concept of prime numbers, I introduce here some constructions, easily reproducible with geometry software that allow us to investigate and see some nice and hidden property obtained by the scholars of the fourteenth century onwards. Regular star polygons and prime numbers Divide a circumference into n equal parts through n points; if we connect all the points in succession, through chords, we get what we recognize as a regular convex polygon. If we choose to connect the points, starting from any one of them in regular steps, two by two, or three by three or, generally, h by h, we get what is called a regular star polygon. It is evident that we are able to create regular star polygons only for certain values of h. Let us divide the circumference, for example, into 15 parts and let's start by connecting the points two by two. In order to close the figure, we return to the starting point after two full turns on the circumference. The polygon that is formed is like the one in Figure 1: a polygon of “order” 15 and “species” two.
    [Show full text]
  • Contractions of Polygons in Abstract Polytopes
    Contractions of Polygons in Abstract Polytopes by Ilya Scheidwasser B.S. in Computer Science, University of Massachusetts Amherst M.S. in Mathematics, Northeastern University A dissertation submitted to The Faculty of the College of Science of Northeastern University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy March 31, 2015 Dissertation directed by Egon Schulte Professor of Mathematics Acknowledgements First, I would like to thank my advisor, Professor Egon Schulte. From the first class I took with him in the first semester of my Masters program, Professor Schulte was an engaging, clear, and kind lecturer, deepening my appreciation for mathematics and always more than happy to provide feedback and answer extra questions about the material. Every class with him was a sincere pleasure, and his classes helped lead me to the study of abstract polytopes. As my advisor, Professor Schulte provided me with invaluable assistance in the creation of this thesis, as well as career advice. For all the time and effort Professor Schulte has put in to my endeavors, I am greatly appreciative. I would also like to thank my dissertation committee for taking time out of their sched- ules to provide me with feedback on this thesis. In addition, I would like to thank the various instructors I've had at Northeastern over the years for nurturing my knowledge of and interest in mathematics. I would like to thank my peers and classmates at Northeastern for their company and their assistance with my studies, and the math department's Teaching Committee for the privilege of lecturing classes these past several years.
    [Show full text]
  • Archimedean Solids
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln MAT Exam Expository Papers Math in the Middle Institute Partnership 7-2008 Archimedean Solids Anna Anderson University of Nebraska-Lincoln Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/mathmidexppap Part of the Science and Mathematics Education Commons Anderson, Anna, "Archimedean Solids" (2008). MAT Exam Expository Papers. 4. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/mathmidexppap/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Math in the Middle Institute Partnership at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in MAT Exam Expository Papers by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Archimedean Solids Anna Anderson In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts in Teaching with a Specialization in the Teaching of Middle Level Mathematics in the Department of Mathematics. Jim Lewis, Advisor July 2008 2 Archimedean Solids A polygon is a simple, closed, planar figure with sides formed by joining line segments, where each line segment intersects exactly two others. If all of the sides have the same length and all of the angles are congruent, the polygon is called regular. The sum of the angles of a regular polygon with n sides, where n is 3 or more, is 180° x (n – 2) degrees. If a regular polygon were connected with other regular polygons in three dimensional space, a polyhedron could be created. In geometry, a polyhedron is a three- dimensional solid which consists of a collection of polygons joined at their edges. The word polyhedron is derived from the Greek word poly (many) and the Indo-European term hedron (seat).
    [Show full text]
  • Simple Polygons Scribe: Michael Goldwasser
    CS268: Geometric Algorithms Handout #5 Design and Analysis Original Handout #15 Stanford University Tuesday, 25 February 1992 Original Lecture #6: 28 January 1991 Topics: Triangulating Simple Polygons Scribe: Michael Goldwasser Algorithms for triangulating polygons are important tools throughout computa- tional geometry. Many problems involving polygons are simplified by partitioning the complex polygon into triangles, and then working with the individual triangles. The applications of such algorithms are well documented in papers involving visibility, motion planning, and computer graphics. The following notes give an introduction to triangulations and many related definitions and basic lemmas. Most of the definitions are based on a simple polygon, P, containing n edges, and hence n vertices. However, many of the definitions and results can be extended to a general arrangement of n line segments. 1 Diagonals Definition 1. Given a simple polygon, P, a diagonal is a line segment between two non-adjacent vertices that lies entirely within the interior of the polygon. Lemma 2. Every simple polygon with jPj > 3 contains a diagonal. Proof: Consider some vertex v. If v has a diagonal, it’s party time. If not then the only vertices visible from v are its neighbors. Therefore v must see some single edge beyond its neighbors that entirely spans the sector of visibility, and therefore v must be a convex vertex. Now consider the two neighbors of v. Since jPj > 3, these cannot be neighbors of each other, however they must be visible from each other because of the above situation, and thus the segment connecting them is indeed a diagonal.
    [Show full text]
  • Petrie Schemes
    Canad. J. Math. Vol. 57 (4), 2005 pp. 844–870 Petrie Schemes Gordon Williams Abstract. Petrie polygons, especially as they arise in the study of regular polytopes and Coxeter groups, have been studied by geometers and group theorists since the early part of the twentieth century. An open question is the determination of which polyhedra possess Petrie polygons that are simple closed curves. The current work explores combinatorial structures in abstract polytopes, called Petrie schemes, that generalize the notion of a Petrie polygon. It is established that all of the regular convex polytopes and honeycombs in Euclidean spaces, as well as all of the Grunbaum–Dress¨ polyhedra, pos- sess Petrie schemes that are not self-intersecting and thus have Petrie polygons that are simple closed curves. Partial results are obtained for several other classes of less symmetric polytopes. 1 Introduction Historically, polyhedra have been conceived of either as closed surfaces (usually topo- logical spheres) made up of planar polygons joined edge to edge or as solids enclosed by such a surface. In recent times, mathematicians have considered polyhedra to be convex polytopes, simplicial spheres, or combinatorial structures such as abstract polytopes or incidence complexes. A Petrie polygon of a polyhedron is a sequence of edges of the polyhedron where any two consecutive elements of the sequence have a vertex and face in common, but no three consecutive edges share a commonface. For the regular polyhedra, the Petrie polygons form the equatorial skew polygons. Petrie polygons may be defined analogously for polytopes as well. Petrie polygons have been very useful in the study of polyhedra and polytopes, especially regular polytopes.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1705.01294V1
    Branes and Polytopes Luca Romano email address: [email protected] ABSTRACT We investigate the hierarchies of half-supersymmetric branes in maximal supergravity theories. By studying the action of the Weyl group of the U-duality group of maximal supergravities we discover a set of universal algebraic rules describing the number of independent 1/2-BPS p-branes, rank by rank, in any dimension. We show that these relations describe the symmetries of certain families of uniform polytopes. This induces a correspondence between half-supersymmetric branes and vertices of opportune uniform polytopes. We show that half-supersymmetric 0-, 1- and 2-branes are in correspondence with the vertices of the k21, 2k1 and 1k2 families of uniform polytopes, respectively, while 3-branes correspond to the vertices of the rectified version of the 2k1 family. For 4-branes and higher rank solutions we find a general behavior. The interpretation of half- supersymmetric solutions as vertices of uniform polytopes reveals some intriguing aspects. One of the most relevant is a triality relation between 0-, 1- and 2-branes. arXiv:1705.01294v1 [hep-th] 3 May 2017 Contents Introduction 2 1 Coxeter Group and Weyl Group 3 1.1 WeylGroup........................................ 6 2 Branes in E11 7 3 Algebraic Structures Behind Half-Supersymmetric Branes 12 4 Branes ad Polytopes 15 Conclusions 27 A Polytopes 30 B Petrie Polygons 30 1 Introduction Since their discovery branes gained a prominent role in the analysis of M-theories and du- alities [1]. One of the most important class of branes consists in Dirichlet branes, or D-branes. D-branes appear in string theory as boundary terms for open strings with mixed Dirichlet-Neumann boundary conditions and, due to their tension, scaling with a negative power of the string cou- pling constant, they are non-perturbative objects [2].
    [Show full text]
  • Regular Polyhedra Through Time
    Fields Institute I. Hubard Polytopes, Maps and their Symmetries September 2011 Regular polyhedra through time The greeks were the first to study the symmetries of polyhedra. Euclid, in his Elements showed that there are only five regular solids (that can be seen in Figure 1). In this context, a polyhe- dron is regular if all its polygons are regular and equal, and you can find the same number of them at each vertex. Figure 1: Platonic Solids. It is until 1619 that Kepler finds other two regular polyhedra: the great dodecahedron and the great icosahedron (on Figure 2. To do so, he allows \false" vertices and intersection of the (convex) faces of the polyhedra at points that are not vertices of the polyhedron, just as the I. Hubard Polytopes, Maps and their Symmetries Page 1 Figure 2: Kepler polyhedra. 1619. pentagram allows intersection of edges at points that are not vertices of the polygon. In this way, the vertex-figure of these two polyhedra are pentagrams (see Figure 3). Figure 3: A regular convex pentagon and a pentagram, also regular! In 1809 Poinsot re-discover Kepler's polyhedra, and discovers its duals: the small stellated dodecahedron and the great stellated dodecahedron (that are shown in Figure 4). The faces of such duals are pentagrams, and are organized on a \convex" way around each vertex. Figure 4: The other two Kepler-Poinsot polyhedra. 1809. A couple of years later Cauchy showed that these are the only four regular \star" polyhedra. We note that the convex hull of the great dodecahedron, great icosahedron and small stellated dodecahedron is the icosahedron, while the convex hull of the great stellated dodecahedron is the dodecahedron.
    [Show full text]
  • Platonic Solids Generate Their Four-Dimensional Analogues.', Acta Crystallographica Section A., 69 (6)
    Durham Research Online Deposited in DRO: 26 January 2014 Version of attached le: Published Version Peer-review status of attached le: Peer-reviewed Citation for published item: Dechant, Pierre-Philippe (2013) 'Platonic solids generate their four-dimensional analogues.', Acta crystallographica section A., 69 (6). pp. 592-602. Further information on publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1107/S0108767313021442 Publisher's copyright statement: Additional information: Published on behalf of the International Union of Crystallography. Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. Durham University Library, Stockton Road, Durham DH1 3LY, United Kingdom Tel : +44 (0)191 334 3042 | Fax : +44 (0)191 334 2971 https://dro.dur.ac.uk electronic reprint Acta Crystallographica Section A Foundations of Crystallography ISSN 0108-7673 Platonic solids generate their four-dimensional analogues Pierre-Philippe Dechant Acta Cryst. (2013). A69, 592–602 Copyright c International Union of Crystallography Author(s) of this paper may load this reprint on their own web site or institutional repository provided that this cover page is retained. Republication of this article or its storage in electronic databases other than as specified above is not permitted without prior permission in writing from the IUCr.
    [Show full text]
  • Uniform Panoploid Tetracombs
    Uniform Panoploid Tetracombs George Olshevsky TETRACOMB is a four-dimensional tessellation. In any tessellation, the honeycells, which are the n-dimensional polytopes that tessellate the space, Amust by definition adjoin precisely along their facets, that is, their ( n!1)- dimensional elements, so that each facet belongs to exactly two honeycells. In the case of tetracombs, the honeycells are four-dimensional polytopes, or polychora, and their facets are polyhedra. For a tessellation to be uniform, the honeycells must all be uniform polytopes, and the vertices must be transitive on the symmetry group of the tessellation. Loosely speaking, therefore, the vertices must be “surrounded all alike” by the honeycells that meet there. If a tessellation is such that every point of its space not on a boundary between honeycells lies in the interior of exactly one honeycell, then it is panoploid. If one or more points of the space not on a boundary between honeycells lie inside more than one honeycell, the tessellation is polyploid. Tessellations may also be constructed that have “holes,” that is, regions that lie inside none of the honeycells; such tessellations are called holeycombs. It is possible for a polyploid tessellation to also be a holeycomb, but not for a panoploid tessellation, which must fill the entire space exactly once. Polyploid tessellations are also called starcombs or star-tessellations. Holeycombs usually arise when (n!1)-dimensional tessellations are themselves permitted to be honeycells; these take up the otherwise free facets that bound the “holes,” so that all the facets continue to belong to two honeycells. In this essay, as per its title, we are concerned with just the uniform panoploid tetracombs.
    [Show full text]