DOCSLIB.ORG

PHIL12A Section Answers, 20 April 2011

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
PHIL12A Section Answers, 20 April 2011 PHIL12A Section answers, 20 April 2011 Julian Jonker 1 From last time... Compare especially (a), (d) and (e) below. 1. (Ex 11.19) (c) No cube with nothing to its left is between two cubes. 8x((Cube(x) ^ :9yLeftOf(y,x)) ! :9z9wBetween(x,z,w)) (d) The only large cubes are b and c. Large(b) ^ Cube(b) ^ Large(c) ^ Cube(c) ^ 8x((Large(x) ^ Cube(x)) ! (x = b _ x = c)) (e) At most b and c are large cubes. NB: last time I omitted the following important tip printed in the textbook. ‘There is a significant difference between this sentence and the previous one. This one does not imply that b and c are large cubes, while the previous one does. 8x((Large(x) ^ Cube(x)) ! (x = b _ x = c)) 2 FOL translation exercises 1. The following sentence is ambiguous. I show you how to translate it twice, showing how the English supports two different FOL translations. Every medium dodecahedron is adjacent to a medium cube. There are two ways to translate this sentence. (Note how I use constructions like ‘for all’ and ’there is some’ in order to make explicit the role of quantifiers in the sentence.) (i) There is some medium cube such that all the medium dodecahedra are next to it. (ii) For every medium dodecahedron there is some medium cube that it is next to. 1 Here are the FOL translations: (i) 9x[Cube(x) ^ Medium(x) ^ 8y((Dodec(y) ^ Medium(y)) ! Adjoins(x,y))] (ii) 8x[(Dodec(x) ^ Medium(x)) ! 9y(Cube(y) ^ Medium(y) ^ Adjoins(x,y))] 2. One of the above translations is strong, and the other weak, in the sense that the strong sentence implies the weaker one, but not vice versa. Indicate which translation is which. (i) is the stronger claim. Whenever (i) is true, (ii) is true too. In other words, every model that makes (ii) true makes (i) true. But there are models that make (ii) true but not (i). So it is not always the case that (i) is true when (ii) is true. 3. (Ex 11.27 and 11.28) Here are two arguments, each of whose first premise is ambiguous. Translate each argument into FOL twice (using sensible predicates), corresponding to the ambiguity in the first premise. Under one translation the conclusion follows: prove it. Under the other it does not: describe a situation in which the premises are true but the conclusion false. (a) (Ex 11.27) 1 Everyone admires someone who has red hair. 2 Anyone who admires himself is conceited. 3 Someone with red hair is conceited. Here’s a translation that makes the argument valid: 1 9x(Red(x) ! 8y(Admires(x,y))) 2 8x(Admires(x,x) ! Conceited(x)) 3 9x(Red(x) ^ Conceited(x) The argument would be invalid if we had translated the first premise as the weaker: 8x9y(Red(y) ^ Admires(y,x)). (b) (Ex 11.28) 1 All that glitters is not gold. 2 This ring glitters. 3 This ring is not gold. The following translation makes the argument valid: 2 1 8x(Glitters(x) !:Gold(x)) 2 Glitters(ring) 3 :Gold(ring The following weaker translation of the first premise would make the argument invalid: :8x(Glitters(x) ! Gold(x)) 3 Proofs with quantifiers 1. Some of the following arguments are valid, some are not. Give an informal proof for those which are valid; for the others, give counterexamples. I’ve done the first one. (a) (Ex 12.4) 1 8y[Cube(y) _ Dodec(y)] 2 8x[Cube(x) ! Large(x)] 3 9x:Large(x) 4 9xDodec(x) Proof. The third premise tells us that there is something which is not large. Let’s call this object d. Now by universal instantiation we have the following: (1) Cube(d) _ Dodec(d) (2) Cube(d) ! Large(d) By modus tollens on (2) above, we have that d is not a cube. But then by (1) above it must be the case that d is a dodecahedron. Since d was an arbitrary object in the domain of discourse, we can by existential instantiation obtain 9xDodec(x), which is our desired conclusion. 3 (b) (Ex 12.5) 1 8y[Cube(y) _ Dodec(y)] 2 8x[Cube(x) ! Large(x)] 3 9x:Large(x) 4 9x[Dodec(x) ^ Small(x)] This argument is not valid. Suppose that there is a medium dodecahedron only. Then the premises are true (check this!) but the conclusion is false. (c) (Ex 12.8) 1 8x[Cube(x) _ (Tet(x) ^ Small(x))] 2 9x[Large(x) ^ BackOf(x,c)] 3 9x[FrontOf(c,x) ^ Cube(x)] Proof: By the second premise there is something which is large and behind c. Let’s call this object e. By Existential Instantiation we get that e is large and that it is behind c. But since BackOf and FrontOf are inverses, we know that c is in front of e. Now by the first premise everything is either a cube or a small tetrahedron, so by Universal Instantiation, e is either a cube or a small tetrahedron. But we know that e is large – so it must be cube. So c is in front of e and e is a cube. But now we use Existential Generalization in order to obtain our conclusion: that there is something that c is in front of and that is a cube. (d) (Ex 12.9) 1 8x[(Cube(x) ^ Large(x)) _ (Tet(x) ^ Small(x))] 2 8x[Tet(x) ! BackOf(x,c)] 3 8x[Small(x) ! BackOf(x,c)] Proof: We’re going to reason about an arbitrary object – it could be any one. For convenience, we’ll call it j. We’ll show by Conditional Proof that if j is small then it is behind c. But since j is arbitrary, this will be true of every object. Suppose j is small. By Universal Instantiation on the first premise we get that j is either a large cube or a small tetrahedron. Since it is small, we know it is a tetrahedron. By Universal Instantiation on the second premise we get that if j is a tetrahedron then it is behind c. So, by modus ponens, j is behind 4 c. So this shows that if j is small, then it is behind c. (In other words, we have proved Small(j) ! BackOf(j,c). But j was arbitrary, so by Universal Generalization, we get that any small object is behind c, which is the desired conclusion. 5.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • The Crystal Forms of Diamond and Their Significance
    THE CRYSTAL FORMS OF DIAMOND AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE BY SIR C. V. RAMAN AND S. RAMASESHAN (From the Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore) Received for publication, June 4, 1946 CONTENTS 1. Introductory Statement. 2. General Descriptive Characters. 3~ Some Theoretical Considerations. 4. Geometric Preliminaries. 5. The Configuration of the Edges. 6. The Crystal Symmetry of Diamond. 7. Classification of the Crystal Forros. 8. The Haidinger Diamond. 9. The Triangular Twins. 10. Some Descriptive Notes. 11. The Allo- tropic Modifications of Diamond. 12. Summary. References. Plates. 1. ~NTRODUCTORY STATEMENT THE" crystallography of diamond presents problems of peculiar interest and difficulty. The material as found is usually in the form of complete crystals bounded on all sides by their natural faces, but strangely enough, these faces generally exhibit a marked curvature. The diamonds found in the State of Panna in Central India, for example, are invariably of this kind. Other diamondsJas for example a group of specimens recently acquired for our studies ffom Hyderabad (Deccan)--show both plane and curved faces in combination. Even those diamonds which at first sight seem to resemble the standard forms of geometric crystallography, such as the rhombic dodeca- hedron or the octahedron, are found on scrutiny to exhibit features which preclude such an identification. This is the case, for example, witb. the South African diamonds presented to us for the purpose of these studŸ by the De Beers Mining Corporation of Kimberley. From these facts it is evident that the crystallography of diamond stands in a class by itself apart from that of other substances and needs to be approached from a distinctive stand- point.
    [Show full text]
  • Bridges Conference Proceedings Guidelines Word
    Bridges 2019 Conference Proceedings Helixation Rinus Roelofs Lansinkweg 28, Hengelo, the Netherlands; [email protected] Abstract In the list of names of the regular and semi-regular polyhedra we find many names that refer to a process. Examples are ‘truncated’ cube and ‘stellated’ dodecahedron. And Luca Pacioli named some of his polyhedral objects ‘elevations’. This kind of name-giving makes it easier to understand these polyhedra. We can imagine the model as a result of a transformation. And nowadays we are able to visualize this process by using the technique of animation. Here I will to introduce ‘helixation’ as a process to get a better understanding of the Poinsot polyhedra. In this paper I will limit myself to uniform polyhedra. Introduction Most of the Archimedean solids can be derived by cutting away parts of a Platonic solid. This operation , with which we can generate most of the semi-regular solids, is called truncation. Figure 1: Truncation of the cube. We can truncate the vertices of a polyhedron until the original faces of the polyhedron become regular again. In Figure 1 this process is shown starting with a cube. In the third object in the row, the vertices are truncated in such a way that the square faces of the cube are transformed to regular octagons. The resulting object is the Archimedean solid, the truncated cube. We can continue the process until we reach the fifth object in the row, which again is an Archimedean solid, the cuboctahedron. The whole process or can be represented as an animation. Also elevation and stellation can be described as processes.
    [Show full text]
  • Dodecahedron
    Dodecahedron Figure 1 Regular Dodecahedron vertex labeling using “120 Polyhedron” vertex labels. COPYRIGHT 2007, Robert W. Gray Page 1 of 9 Encyclopedia Polyhedra: Last Revision: July 8, 2007 DODECAHEDRON Topology: Vertices = 20 Edges = 30 Faces = 12 pentagons Lengths: 15+ ϕ = 1.618 033 989 2 EL ≡ Edge length of regular Dodecahedron. 43ϕ + FA = EL 1.538 841 769 EL ≡ Face altitude. 2 ϕ DFV = EL ≅ 0.850 650 808 EL 5 15+ 20 ϕ DFE = EL ≅ 0.688 190 960 EL 10 3 DVV = ϕ EL ≅ 1.401 258 538 EL 2 1 DVE = ϕ 2 EL ≅ 1.309 016 994 EL 2 711+ ϕ DVF = EL ≅ 1.113 516 364 EL 20 COPYRIGHT 2007, Robert W. Gray Page 2 of 9 Encyclopedia Polyhedra: Last Revision: July 8, 2007 DODECAHEDRON Areas: 15+ 20 ϕ 2 2 Area of one pentagonal face = EL ≅ 1.720 477 401 EL 4 2 2 Total face area = 31520+ ϕ EL ≅ 20.645 728 807 EL Volume: 47+ ϕ 3 3 Cubic measure volume equation = EL ≅ 7.663 118 961 EL 2 38( + 14ϕ) 3 3 Synergetics' Tetra-volume equation = EL ≅ 65.023 720 585 EL 2 Angles: Face Angles: All face angles are 108°. Sum of face angles = 6480° Central Angles: ⎛⎞35− All central angles are = 2arcsin ⎜⎟ ≅ 41.810 314 896° ⎜⎟6 ⎝⎠ Dihedral Angles: ⎛⎞2 ϕ 2 All dihedral angles are = 2arcsin ⎜⎟ ≅ 116.565 051 177° ⎝⎠43ϕ + COPYRIGHT 2007, Robert W. Gray Page 3 of 9 Encyclopedia Polyhedra: Last Revision: July 8, 2007 DODECAHEDRON Additional Angle Information: Note that Central Angle(Dodecahedron) + Dihedral Angle(Icosahedron) = 180° Central Angle(Icosahedron) + Dihedral Angle(Dodecahedron) = 180° which is the case for dual polyhedra.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2105.14305V1 [Cs.CG] 29 May 2021
    Efficient Folding Algorithms for Regular Polyhedra ∗ Tonan Kamata1 Akira Kadoguchi2 Takashi Horiyama3 Ryuhei Uehara1 1 School of Information Science, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (JAIST), Ishikawa, Japan fkamata,[email protected] 2 Intelligent Vision & Image Systems (IVIS), Tokyo, Japan [email protected] 3 Faculty of Information Science and Technology, Hokkaido University, Hokkaido, Japan [email protected] Abstract We investigate the folding problem that asks if a polygon P can be folded to a polyhedron Q for given P and Q. Recently, an efficient algorithm for this problem has been developed when Q is a box. We extend this idea to regular polyhedra, also known as Platonic solids. The basic idea of our algorithms is common, which is called stamping. However, the computational complexities of them are different depending on their geometric properties. We developed four algorithms for the problem as follows. (1) An algorithm for a regular tetrahedron, which can be extended to a tetramonohedron. (2) An algorithm for a regular hexahedron (or a cube), which is much efficient than the previously known one. (3) An algorithm for a general deltahedron, which contains the cases that Q is a regular octahedron or a regular icosahedron. (4) An algorithm for a regular dodecahedron. Combining these algorithms, we can conclude that the folding problem can be solved pseudo-polynomial time when Q is a regular polyhedron and other related solid. Keywords: Computational origami folding problem pseudo-polynomial time algorithm regular poly- hedron (Platonic solids) stamping 1 Introduction In 1525, the German painter Albrecht D¨urerpublished his masterwork on geometry [5], whose title translates as \On Teaching Measurement with a Compass and Straightedge for lines, planes, and whole bodies." In the book, he presented each polyhedron by drawing a net, which is an unfolding of the surface of the polyhedron to a planar layout without overlapping by cutting along its edges.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1705.00100V1 [Math.HO] 28 Apr 2017 We Can Get an Elbow That Is 22.5 Degrees (Which Is Half of 45 Degrees)
    PVC Polyhedra David Glickenstein∗ University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721 May 2, 2017 Abstract We describe how to construct a dodecahedron, tetrahedron, cube, and octahedron out of pvc pipes using standard fittings. 1 Introduction I wanted to build a huge dodecahedron for a museum exhibit. What better way to draw interest than a huge structure that you can walk around and through? The question was how to fabricate such an object? The dodecahedron is a fairly simple solid, made up of edges meeting in threes at certain angles that form pentagon faces. We could have them 3D printed. But could we do this with “off-the-shelf" parts? The answer is yes, as seen in Figure 1. The key fact to consider is that each vertex corner consists of three edges coming together in a fairly symmetric way. Therefore, we can take a connector with three pipe inputs and make the corner a graph over it. In particular, if we take a connector that takes three pipes each at 120 degree angles from the others (this is called a \true wye") and we take elbows of the appropriate angle, we can make the edges come together below the center at exactly the correct angles. 2 What is the correct elbow angle? Suppose the wye has three length 1 pipes connected to it and the actual vertex v is below the vertexpvW of the wye. Let X and Y be the endpoints of two of the wye segments. Then the segment XY is of length 3 since it is opposite a 120 degree angle in the triangle XY vW : We know that the angle XvY at vertex v has the angle of a regular pentagon, which is 108 degrees.
    [Show full text]
  • Instructions for Plato's Solids
    Includes 195 precision START HERE! Plato’s Solids The Platonic Solids are named Zometool components, Instructions according to the number of faces 50 foam dual pieces, (F) they possess. For example, and detailed instructions You can build the five Platonic Solids, by Dr. Robert Fathauer “octahedron” means “8-faces.” The or polyhedra, and their duals. number of Faces (F), Edges (E) and Vertices (V) for each solid are shown A polyhedron is a solid whose faces are Why are there only 5 perfect 3D shapes? This secret was below. An edge is a line where two polygons. Only fiveconvex regular polyhe- closely guarded by ancient Greeks, and is the mathematical faces meet, and a vertex is a point dra exist (i.e., each face is the same type basis of nearly all natural and human-built structures. where three or more faces meet. of regular polygon—a triangle, square or Build all five of Plato’s solids in relation to their duals, and see pentagon—and there are the same num- Each Platonic Solid has another how they represent the 5 elements: ber of faces around every corner.) Platonic Solid as its dual. The dual • the Tetrahedron (4-faces) = fire of the tetrahedron (“4-faces”) is again If you put a point in the center of each face • the Cube (6-faces) = earth a tetrahedron; the dual of the cube is • the Octahedron (8-faces) = water of a polyhedron, and connect those points the octahedron (“8-faces”), and vice • the Icosahedron (20-faces) = air to their nearest neighbors, you get its dual.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Symmetry Preserving Operations on Polyhedra
    Local Symmetry Preserving Operations on Polyhedra Pieter Goetschalckx Submitted to the Faculty of Sciences of Ghent University in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Science: Mathematics. Supervisors prof. dr. dr. Kris Coolsaet dr. Nico Van Cleemput Chair prof. dr. Marnix Van Daele Examination Board prof. dr. Tomaž Pisanski prof. dr. Jan De Beule prof. dr. Tom De Medts dr. Carol T. Zamfirescu dr. Jan Goedgebeur © 2020 Pieter Goetschalckx Department of Applied Mathematics, Computer Science and Statistics Faculty of Sciences, Ghent University This work is licensed under a “CC BY 4.0” licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en In memory of John Horton Conway (1937–2020) Contents Acknowledgements 9 Dutch summary 13 Summary 17 List of publications 21 1 A brief history of operations on polyhedra 23 1 Platonic, Archimedean and Catalan solids . 23 2 Conway polyhedron notation . 31 3 The Goldberg-Coxeter construction . 32 3.1 Goldberg ....................... 32 3.2 Buckminster Fuller . 37 3.3 Caspar and Klug ................... 40 3.4 Coxeter ........................ 44 4 Other approaches ....................... 45 References ............................... 46 2 Embedded graphs, tilings and polyhedra 49 1 Combinatorial graphs .................... 49 2 Embedded graphs ....................... 51 3 Symmetry and isomorphisms . 55 4 Tilings .............................. 57 5 Polyhedra ............................ 59 6 Chamber systems ....................... 60 7 Connectivity .......................... 62 References
    [Show full text]
  • Paper Models of Polyhedra
    Paper Models of Polyhedra Gijs Korthals Altes Polyhedra are beautiful 3-D geometrical figures that have fascinated philosophers, mathematicians and artists for millennia Copyrights © 1998-2001 Gijs.Korthals Altes All rights reserved . It's permitted to make copies for non-commercial purposes only email: [email protected] Paper Models of Polyhedra Platonic Solids Dodecahedron Cube and Tetrahedron Octahedron Icosahedron Archimedean Solids Cuboctahedron Icosidodecahedron Truncated Tetrahedron Truncated Octahedron Truncated Cube Truncated Icosahedron (soccer ball) Truncated dodecahedron Rhombicuboctahedron Truncated Cuboctahedron Rhombicosidodecahedron Truncated Icosidodecahedron Snub Cube Snub Dodecahedron Kepler-Poinsot Polyhedra Great Stellated Dodecahedron Small Stellated Dodecahedron Great Icosahedron Great Dodecahedron Other Uniform Polyhedra Tetrahemihexahedron Octahemioctahedron Cubohemioctahedron Small Rhombihexahedron Small Rhombidodecahedron S mall Dodecahemiododecahedron Small Ditrigonal Icosidodecahedron Great Dodecahedron Compounds Stella Octangula Compound of Cube and Octahedron Compound of Dodecahedron and Icosahedron Compound of Two Cubes Compound of Three Cubes Compound of Five Cubes Compound of Five Octahedra Compound of Five Tetrahedra Compound of Truncated Icosahedron and Pentakisdodecahedron Other Polyhedra Pentagonal Hexecontahedron Pentagonalconsitetrahedron Pyramid Pentagonal Pyramid Decahedron Rhombic Dodecahedron Great Rhombihexacron Pentagonal Dipyramid Pentakisdodecahedron Small Triakisoctahedron Small Triambic
    [Show full text]
  • Mathematical Origami: Phizz Dodecahedron
    Mathematical Origami: • It follows that each interior angle of a polygon face must measure less PHiZZ Dodecahedron than 120 degrees. • The only regular polygons with interior angles measuring less than 120 degrees are the equilateral triangle, square and regular pentagon. Therefore each vertex of a Platonic solid may be composed of • 3 equilateral triangles (angle sum: 3 60 = 180 ) × ◦ ◦ • 4 equilateral triangles (angle sum: 4 60 = 240 ) × ◦ ◦ • 5 equilateral triangles (angle sum: 5 60 = 300 ) × ◦ ◦ We will describe how to make a regular dodecahedron using Tom Hull’s PHiZZ • 3 squares (angle sum: 3 90 = 270 ) modular origami units. First we need to know how many faces, edges and × ◦ ◦ vertices a dodecahedron has. Let’s begin by discussing the Platonic solids. • 3 regular pentagons (angle sum: 3 108 = 324 ) × ◦ ◦ The Platonic Solids These are the five Platonic solids. A Platonic solid is a convex polyhedron with congruent regular polygon faces and the same number of faces meeting at each vertex. There are five Platonic solids: tetrahedron, cube, octahedron, dodecahedron, and icosahedron. #Faces/ The solids are named after the ancient Greek philosopher Plato who equated Solid Face Vertex #Faces them with the four classical elements: earth with the cube, air with the octa- hedron, water with the icosahedron, and fire with the tetrahedron). The fifth tetrahedron 3 4 solid, the dodecahedron, was believed to be used to make the heavens. octahedron 4 8 Why Are There Exactly Five Platonic Solids? Let’s consider the vertex of a Platonic solid. Recall that the same number of faces meet at each vertex. icosahedron 5 20 Then the following must be true.
    [Show full text]
  • Wythoffian Skeletal Polyhedra
    Wythoffian Skeletal Polyhedra by Abigail Williams B.S. in Mathematics, Bates College 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 April 14, 2015 Dissertation directed by Egon Schulte Professor of Mathematics Dedication I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my Meme. She has always been my loudest cheerleader and has supported me in all that I have done. Thank you, Meme. ii Abstract of Dissertation Wythoff's construction can be used to generate new polyhedra from the symmetry groups of the regular polyhedra. In this dissertation we examine all polyhedra that can be generated through this construction from the 48 regular polyhedra. We also examine when the construction produces uniform polyhedra and then discuss other methods for finding uniform polyhedra. iii Acknowledgements I would like to start by thanking Professor Schulte for all of the guidance he has provided me over the last few years. He has given me interesting articles to read, provided invaluable commentary on this thesis, had many helpful and insightful discussions with me about my work, and invited me to wonderful conferences. I truly cannot thank him enough for all of his help. I am also very thankful to my committee members for their time and attention. Additionally, I want to thank my family and friends who, for years, have supported me and pretended to care everytime I start talking about math. Finally, I want to thank my husband, Keith.
    [Show full text]
  • Operation-Based Notation for Archimedean Graph
    Operation-Based Notation for Archimedean Graph Hidetoshi Nonaka Research Group of Mathematical Information Science Division of Computer Science, Hokkaido University N14W9, Sapporo, 060 0814, Japan ABSTRACT Table 1. The list of Archimedean solids, where p, q, r are the number of vertices, edges, and faces, respectively. We introduce three graph operations corresponding to Symbol Name of polyhedron p q r polyhedral operations. By applying these operations, thirteen Archimedean graphs can be generated from Platonic graphs that A(3⋅4)2 Cuboctahedron 12 24 14 are used as seed graphs. A4610⋅⋅ Great Rhombicosidodecahedron 120 180 62 A468⋅⋅ Great Rhombicuboctahedron 48 72 26 Keyword: Archimedean graph, Polyhedral graph, Polyhedron A 2 Icosidodecahedron 30 60 32 notation, Graph operation. (3⋅ 5) A3454⋅⋅⋅ Small Rhombicosidodecahedron 60 120 62 1. INTRODUCTION A3⋅43 Small Rhombicuboctahedron 24 48 26 A34 ⋅4 Snub Cube 24 60 38 Archimedean graph is a simple planar graph isomorphic to the A354 ⋅ Snub Dodecahedron 60 150 92 skeleton or wire-frame of the Archimedean solid. There are A38⋅ 2 Truncated Cube 24 36 14 thirteen Archimedean solids, which are semi-regular polyhedra A3⋅102 Truncated Dodecahedron 60 90 32 and the subset of uniform polyhedra. Seven of them can be A56⋅ 2 Truncated Icosahedron 60 90 32 formed by truncation of Platonic solids, and all of them can be A 2 Truncated Octahedron 24 36 14 formed by polyhedral operations defined as Conway polyhedron 4⋅6 A 2 Truncated Tetrahedron 12 18 8 notation [1-2]. 36⋅ The author has recently developed an interactive modeling system of uniform polyhedra including Platonic solids, Archimedean solids and Kepler-Poinsot solids, based on graph drawing and simulated elasticity, mainly for educational purpose [3-5].
    [Show full text]