DOCSLIB.ORG

The Icosahedron from Spheres

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Icosahedron from Spheres CPS Geometry Part 2 – Platonic Solids 8. Introduction - Platonic Solids And CPS 9. The Tetrahedron in CPS 10. The Octahedron in CPS 11. The Cube in CPS 12. The Icosahedron in CPS 13. The Dodecahedron in CPS Nick Trif Ottawa, Ontario, Canada – 2018 www.platonicstructures.com CPS Geometry Part 2 – Platonic Solids – 12: The Icosahedron from Spheres YouTube: https://youtu.be/7aBUxnYcQCg As we have seen in the previous videos, the tetrahedron, octahedron and cube can be easily assembled in CPS. How about the icosahedron? The larger the number the spheres one uses, the more precise platonic solid one gets. The larger the number the spheres one uses, the more precise platonic solid one gets. For these three solids, even a relatively small number of spheres, will give a very well defined platonic solid. The icosahedron does not follow the same rule. To get a reasonable icosahedron shape, one needs a large number of spheres. Let's see two such icosahedrons. First presented here requires 892 spheres and the second one involves 5282 spheres. When more and more spheres are used, arranged in the same pattern, a more perfect icosahedron start to emerge. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. Only the shell of the icosahedron will be shown. We want to make sure the necessary details of the icosahedron's structure are clearly seen. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. Only the shell of the icosahedron will be shown. We want to make sure the necessary details of the icosahedron's structure are clearly seen. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. Only the shell of the icosahedron will be shown. We want to make sure the necessary details of the icosahedron's structure are clearly seen. The structures are presented as Platonic Structures first, and as combination of surfaces next. The structures are presented as platonic structures first, and as combination of surfaces next. The structures are presented as platonic structures first, and as combination of surfaces next. The structures are presented as platonic structures first, and as combination of surfaces next. The structures are presented as platonic structures first, and as combination of surfaces next. As expected, all faces of the icosahedron are equilateral triangles; this makes this solid an icosahedron. As expected, all faces of the icosahedron are equilateral triangles; this makes this solid an icosahedron. As expected, all faces of the icosahedron are equilateral triangles; this makes this solid an icosahedron. A preliminary investigation of the pattern reveals that these triangular faces have two underlining patterns. As expected, all faces of the icosahedron are equilateral triangles; this makes this solid an icosahedron. A preliminary investigation of the pattern reveals that these triangular faces have two underlining patterns. Let's concentrate first on the eight faces with the hexagonal pattern; we have already seen this pattern in tetrahedron. As expected, all faces of the icosahedron are equilateral triangles; this makes this solid an icosahedron. A preliminary investigation of the pattern reveals that these triangular faces have two underlining patterns. Let's concentrate first on the eight faces with the hexagonal pattern; we have already seen this pattern in tetrahedron. As expected, all faces of the icosahedron are equilateral triangles; this makes this solid an icosahedron. A preliminary investigation of the pattern reveals that these triangular faces have two underlining patterns. Let's concentrate first on the eight faces with the hexagonal pattern; we have already seen this pattern in tetrahedron. In CPS, the twelve directions, from a sphere to its neighbors, do not allow the existence of the five identical plane surfaces meeting in the vertex of the icosahedron. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. If one wants to proceed with the search for icosahedron in CPS, one must allow different types of underlining lattices for the five surfaces meeting in a vertex. Next, we can add the other 12 faces. All these faces also have the same underlining pattern, or lattice. This new pattern is specific to icosahedron and is different from both the hexagonal pattern or the square pattern seen before. The intersections of lines in this model are the nodes of the platonic structure. The lines are the rods. The icosahedron shell, presented next, can be built as a platonic structure using 6226 nodes and 20380 struts. These videos and the 3-D models on our web site cannot show the full beauty of this structure. The only way to really appreciate this structure, in its entire splendor, is to build it as a real 3-D platonic structure. I can promise you that you will not be disappointed. The only way to really appreciate this structure, in its entire splendor, is to build it as a real 3-D platonic structure. I can promise you that you will not be disappointed. It is worth having a closer look to the vertices of the icosahedron. All twelve vertices are identical. The nodes involve in defining these nodes are connected in exactly the same way. There are five surfaces meeting in each vertex - two based on a hexagonal lattice and three based on a new type of lattice. We should get familiar with these connections and try to remember them. It is quite remarkable that the icosahedron can be assembled from identical spheres. This fact should strengthen our conviction that, the points in space, are distributed in a CPS arrangement. In the next slide, more and more similar facts will solidify this explanation. To start to understand this pattern, we will use four icosahedrons that can be assembled using larger and larger numbers of spheres. www.platonicstructures.com Beauty makes beautiful things beautiful!.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Systematic Narcissism
    Systematic Narcissism Wendy W. Fok University of Houston Systematic Narcissism is a hybridization through the notion of the plane- tary grid system and the symmetry of narcissism. The installation is based on the obsession of the physical reflection of the object/subject relation- ship, created by the idea of man-made versus planetary projected planes (grids) which humans have made onto the earth. ie: Pierre Charles L’Enfant plan 1791 of the golden section projected onto Washington DC. The fostered form is found based on a triacontahedron primitive and devel- oped according to the primitive angles. Every angle has an increment of 0.25m and is based on a system of derivatives. As indicated, the geometry of the world (or the globe) is based off the planetary grid system, which, according to Bethe Hagens and William S. Becker is a hexakis icosahedron grid system. The formal mathematical aspects of the installation are cre- ated by the offset of that geometric form. The base of the planetary grid and the narcissus reflection of the modular pieces intersect the geometry of the interfacing modular that structures the installation BACKGROUND: Poetics: Narcissism is a fixation with oneself. The Greek myth of Narcissus depicted a prince who sat by a reflective pond for days, self-absorbed by his own beauty. Mathematics: In 1978, Professors William Becker and Bethe Hagens extended the Russian model, inspired by Buckminster Fuller’s geodesic dome, into a grid based on the rhombic triacontahedron, the dual of the icosidodeca- heron Archimedean solid. The triacontahedron has 30 diamond-shaped faces, and possesses the combined vertices of the icosahedron and the dodecahedron.
    [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]
  • Shape Skeletons Creating Polyhedra with Straws
    Shape Skeletons Creating Polyhedra with Straws Topics: 3-Dimensional Shapes, Regular Solids, Geometry Materials List Drinking straws or stir straws, cut in Use simple materials to investigate regular or advanced 3-dimensional shapes. half Fun to create, these shapes make wonderful showpieces and learning tools! Paperclips to use with the drinking Assembly straws or chenille 1. Choose which shape to construct. Note: the 4-sided tetrahedron, 8-sided stems to use with octahedron, and 20-sided icosahedron have triangular faces and will form sturdier the stir straws skeletal shapes. The 6-sided cube with square faces and the 12-sided Scissors dodecahedron with pentagonal faces will be less sturdy. See the Taking it Appropriate tool for Further section. cutting the wire in the chenille stems, Platonic Solids if used This activity can be used to teach: Common Core Math Tetrahedron Cube Octahedron Dodecahedron Icosahedron Standards: Angles and volume Polyhedron Faces Shape of Face Edges Vertices and measurement Tetrahedron 4 Triangles 6 4 (Measurement & Cube 6 Squares 12 8 Data, Grade 4, 5, 6, & Octahedron 8 Triangles 12 6 7; Grade 5, 3, 4, & 5) Dodecahedron 12 Pentagons 30 20 2-Dimensional and 3- Dimensional Shapes Icosahedron 20 Triangles 30 12 (Geometry, Grades 2- 12) 2. Use the table and images above to construct the selected shape by creating one or Problem Solving and more face shapes and then add straws or join shapes at each of the vertices: Reasoning a. For drinking straws and paperclips: Bend the (Mathematical paperclips so that the 2 loops form a “V” or “L” Practices Grades 2- shape as needed, widen the narrower loop and insert 12) one loop into the end of one straw half, and the other loop into another straw half.
    [Show full text]
  • Rhombic Triacontahedron
    Rhombic Triacontahedron Figure 1 Rhombic Triacontahedron. Vertex labels as used for the corresponding vertices of the 120 Polyhedron. COPYRIGHT 2007, Robert W. Gray Page 1 of 11 Encyclopedia Polyhedra: Last Revision: August 5, 2007 RHOMBIC TRIACONTAHEDRON Figure 2 Icosahedron (red) and Dodecahedron (yellow) define the rhombic Triacontahedron (green). Figure 3 “Long” (red) and “short” (yellow) face diagonals and vertices. COPYRIGHT 2007, Robert W. Gray Page 2 of 11 Encyclopedia Polyhedra: Last Revision: August 5, 2007 RHOMBIC TRIACONTAHEDRON Topology: Vertices = 32 Edges = 60 Faces = 30 diamonds Lengths: 15+ ϕ = 2 EL ≡ Edge length of rhombic Triacontahedron. ϕ + 2 EL = FDL ≅ 0.587 785 252 FDL 2ϕ 3 − ϕ = DVF ϕ 2 FDL ≡ Long face diagonal = DVF ≅ 1.236 067 977 DVF ϕ 2 = EL ≅ 1.701 301 617 EL 3 − ϕ 1 FDS ≡ Short face diagonal = FDL ≅ 0.618 033 989 FDL ϕ 2 = DVF ≅ 0.763 932 023 DVF ϕ 2 2 = EL ≅ 1.051 462 224 EL ϕ + 2 COPYRIGHT 2007, Robert W. Gray Page 3 of 11 Encyclopedia Polyhedra: Last Revision: August 5, 2007 RHOMBIC TRIACONTAHEDRON DFVL ≡ Center of face to vertex at the end of a long face diagonal 1 = FDL 2 1 = DVF ≅ 0.618 033 989 DVF ϕ 1 = EL ≅ 0.850 650 808 EL 3 − ϕ DFVS ≡ Center of face to vertex at the end of a short face diagonal 1 = FDL ≅ 0.309 016 994 FDL 2 ϕ 1 = DVF ≅ 0.381 966 011 DVF ϕ 2 1 = EL ≅ 0.525 731 112 EL ϕ + 2 ϕ + 2 DFE = FDL ≅ 0.293 892 626 FDL 4 ϕ ϕ + 2 = DVF ≅ 0.363 271 264 DVF 21()ϕ + 1 = EL 2 ϕ 3 − ϕ DVVL = FDL ≅ 0.951 056 516 FDL 2 = 3 − ϕ DVF ≅ 1.175 570 505 DVF = ϕ EL ≅ 1.618 033 988 EL COPYRIGHT 2007, Robert W.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Every Face of a Polyhedron Have Many Sides ?
    Can Every Face of a Polyhedron Have Many Sides ? Branko Grünbaum Dedicated to Joe Malkevitch, an old friend and colleague, who was always partial to polyhedra Abstract. The simple question of the title has many different answers, depending on the kinds of faces we are willing to consider, on the types of polyhedra we admit, and on the symmetries we require. Known results and open problems about this topic are presented. The main classes of objects considered here are the following, listed in increasing generality: Faces: convex n-gons, starshaped n-gons, simple n-gons –– for n ≥ 3. Polyhedra (in Euclidean 3-dimensional space): convex polyhedra, starshaped polyhedra, acoptic polyhedra, polyhedra with selfintersections. Symmetry properties of polyhedra P: Isohedron –– all faces of P in one orbit under the group of symmetries of P; monohedron –– all faces of P are mutually congru- ent; ekahedron –– all faces have of P the same number of sides (eka –– Sanskrit for "one"). If the number of sides is k, we shall use (k)-isohedron, (k)-monohedron, and (k)- ekahedron, as appropriate. We shall first describe the results that either can be found in the literature, or ob- tained by slight modifications of these. Then we shall show how two systematic ap- proaches can be used to obtain results that are better –– although in some cases less visu- ally attractive than the old ones. There are many possible combinations of these classes of faces, polyhedra and symmetries, but considerable reductions in their number are possible; we start with one of these, which is well known even if it is hard to give specific references for precisely the assertion of Theorem 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Truncated Icosahedron As an Inflatable Ball
    https://doi.org/10.3311/PPar.12375 Creative Commons Attribution b |99 Periodica Polytechnica Architecture, 49(2), pp. 99–108, 2018 The Truncated Icosahedron as an Inflatable Ball Tibor Tarnai1, András Lengyel1* 1 Department of Structural Mechanics, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, H-1521 Budapest, P.O.B. 91, Hungary * Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected] Received: 09 April 2018, Accepted: 20 June 2018, Published online: 29 October 2018 Abstract In the late 1930s, an inflatable truncated icosahedral beach-ball was made such that its hexagonal faces were coloured with five different colours. This ball was an unnoticed invention. It appeared more than twenty years earlier than the first truncated icosahedral soccer ball. In connection with the colouring of this beach-ball, the present paper investigates the following problem: How many colourings of the dodecahedron with five colours exist such that all vertices of each face are coloured differently? The paper shows that four ways of colouring exist and refers to other colouring problems, pointing out a defect in the colouring of the original beach-ball. Keywords polyhedron, truncated icosahedron, compound of five tetrahedra, colouring of polyhedra, permutation, inflatable ball 1 Introduction Spherical forms play an important role in different fields – not even among the relics of the Romans who inherited of science and technology, and in different areas of every- many ball games from the Greeks. day life. For example, spherical domes are quite com- The Romans mainly used balls composed of equal mon in architecture, and spherical balls are used in most digonal panels, forming a regular hosohedron (Coxeter, 1973, ball games.
    [Show full text]
  • Polyhedral Harmonics
    value is uncertain; 4 Gr a y d o n has suggested values of £estrap + A0 for the first three excited 4,4 + 0,1 v. e. states indicate 11,1 v.e. för D0. The value 6,34 v.e. for Dextrap for SO leads on A rough correlation between Dextrap and bond correction by 0,37 + 0,66 for the'valence states of type is evident for the more stable states of the the two atoms to D0 ^ 5,31 v.e., in approximate agreement with the precisely known value 5,184 v.e. diatomic molecules. Thus the bonds A = A and The valence state for nitrogen, at 27/100 F2 A = A between elements of the first short period (with 2D at 9/25 F2 and 2P at 3/5 F2), is calculated tend to have dissociation energy to the atomic to lie about 1,67 v.e. above the normal state, 4S, valence state equal to about 6,6 v.e. Examples that for the iso-electronic oxygen ion 0+ is 2,34 are 0+ X, 6,51; N2 B, 6,68; N2 a, 6,56; C2 A, v.e., and that for phosphorus is 1,05 v.e. above 7,05; C2 b, 6,55 v.e. An increase, presumably due their normal states. Similarly the bivalent states to the stabilizing effect of the partial ionic cha- of carbon, : C •, the nitrogen ion, : N • and racter of the double bond, is observed when the atoms differ by 0,5 in electronegativity: NO X, Silicon,:Si •, are 0,44 v.e., 0,64 v.e., and 0,28 v.e., 7,69; CN A, 7,62 v.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Putting the Icosahedron Into the Octahedron
    Forum Geometricorum Volume 17 (2017) 63–71. FORUM GEOM ISSN 1534-1178 Putting the Icosahedron into the Octahedron Paris Pamfilos Abstract. We compute the dimensions of a regular tetragonal pyramid, which allows a cut by a plane along a regular pentagon. In addition, we relate this construction to a simple construction of the icosahedron and make a conjecture on the impossibility to generalize such sections of regular pyramids. 1. Pentagonal sections The present discussion could be entitled Organizing calculations with Menelaos, and originates from a problem from the book of Sharygin [2, p. 147], in which it is required to construct a pentagonal section of a regular pyramid with quadrangular F J I D T L C K H E M a x A G B U V Figure 1. Pentagonal section of quadrangular pyramid basis. The basis of the pyramid is a square of side-length a and the pyramid is assumed to be regular, i.e. its apex F is located on the orthogonal at the center E of the square at a distance h = |EF| from it (See Figure 1). The exercise asks for the determination of the height h if we know that there is a section GHIJK of the pyramid by a plane which is a regular pentagon. The section is tacitly assumed to be symmetric with respect to the diagonal symmetry plane AF C of the pyramid and defined by a plane through the three points K, G, I. The first two, K and G, lying symmetric with respect to the diagonal AC of the square.
    [Show full text]
  • Icosahedral Polyhedra from 6 Lattice and Danzer's ABCK Tiling
    Icosahedral Polyhedra from 퐷6 lattice and Danzer’s ABCK tiling Abeer Al-Siyabi, a Nazife Ozdes Koca, a* and Mehmet Kocab aDepartment of Physics, College of Science, Sultan Qaboos University, P.O. Box 36, Al-Khoud, 123 Muscat, Sultanate of Oman, bDepartment of Physics, Cukurova University, Adana, Turkey, retired, *Correspondence e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT It is well known that the point group of the root lattice 퐷6 admits the icosahedral group as a maximal subgroup. The generators of the icosahedral group 퐻3 , its roots and weights are determined in terms of those of 퐷6 . Platonic and Archimedean solids possessing icosahedral symmetry have been obtained by projections of the sets of lattice vectors of 퐷6 determined by a pair of integers (푚1, 푚2 ) in most cases, either both even or both odd. Vertices of the Danzer’s ABCK tetrahedra are determined as the fundamental weights of 퐻3 and it is shown that the inflation of the tiles can be obtained as projections of the lattice vectors characterized by the pair of integers which are linear combinations of the integers (푚1, 푚2 ) with coefficients from Fibonacci sequence. Tiling procedure both for the ABCK tetrahedral and the < 퐴퐵퐶퐾 > octahedral tilings in 3D space with icosahedral symmetry 퐻3 and those related transformations in 6D space with 퐷6 symmetry are specified by determining the rotations and translations in 3D and the corresponding group elements in 퐷6 .The tetrahedron K constitutes the fundamental region of the icosahedral group and generates the rhombic triacontahedron upon the group action. Properties of “K-polyhedron”, “B-polyhedron” and “C-polyhedron” generated by the icosahedral group have been discussed.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric
    U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Weather Service National Centers for Environmental Prediction 5200 Auth Road Camp Springs, MD 20746-4304 Office Note 467 A standardized procedure for the derivation of smooth and partially overset grids on the sphere, associated with polyhedra that admit regular griddings of their surfaces. Part I: Mathematical principles of classification and construction R. James Purser∗ and Miodrag Ranˇci´c IM Systems Group, Rockville, Maryland December 15, 2011 This is an unreviewed manuscript, primarily intended for informal exchange of information among the ncep staff members ∗ email: [email protected] 1. Introduction Modern global grid point models of the atmosphere are not well served by the traditional horizontal grids based on the latitude and longitude coordinate framework. The character and stability of the numerical solutions on such a grid are radically and adversely affected by the excessive east-west resolution of the grid at high latitudes, unless the models invoke a strong low-pass spatial filter at every time step. These unwelcome features of the latitude- longitude grid have been acknowledged and understood for many years and, although various remedial measures have been devised to ameliorate the time step restrictions and other problems caused by the convergence of meridians at the poles, the results are often less than satisfactory. With the widespread adoption of massively parallel computation, and the consequent need to apportion different parts of the horizontal grid to separate communicating processors, new difficulties associated with the latitude-longitude grids emerge. Near the poles, relatively short geographical distances can be very many grid units apart, making the practical problem of subdividing the grid for efficient parallel processing an extremely challenging one.
    [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]
  • Are Your Polyhedra the Same As My Polyhedra?
    Are Your Polyhedra the Same as My Polyhedra? Branko Gr¨unbaum 1 Introduction “Polyhedron” means different things to different people. There is very little in common between the meaning of the word in topology and in geometry. But even if we confine attention to geometry of the 3-dimensional Euclidean space – as we shall do from now on – “polyhedron” can mean either a solid (as in “Platonic solids”, convex polyhedron, and other contexts), or a surface (such as the polyhedral models constructed from cardboard using “nets”, which were introduced by Albrecht D¨urer [17] in 1525, or, in a more mod- ern version, by Aleksandrov [1]), or the 1-dimensional complex consisting of points (“vertices”) and line-segments (“edges”) organized in a suitable way into polygons (“faces”) subject to certain restrictions (“skeletal polyhedra”, diagrams of which have been presented first by Luca Pacioli [44] in 1498 and attributed to Leonardo da Vinci). The last alternative is the least usual one – but it is close to what seems to be the most useful approach to the theory of general polyhedra. Indeed, it does not restrict faces to be planar, and it makes possible to retrieve the other characterizations in circumstances in which they reasonably apply: If the faces of a “surface” polyhedron are sim- ple polygons, in most cases the polyhedron is unambiguously determined by the boundary circuits of the faces. And if the polyhedron itself is without selfintersections, then the “solid” can be found from the faces. These reasons, as well as some others, seem to warrant the choice of our approach.
    [Show full text]