All the 2-d polygons that can be used to form 3-d polyhedrons











up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1












The requirement is that we start with a 2-d polygon and using just copies of this polygon, cobble them together into a closed 3-d polyhedron (no gaps). I want to find a way to identify all such 2-d polygons.



Here are the ones I'm aware of -



All the platonic solids obviously satisfy this requirement. So, the equilateral triangle which can be used to form the Tetrahedron, Octahedron and Icosahedron. Then there is the square which can be used to form the Cube and finally the regular pentagon which can be used to form the Dodecahedron.



Apart from these, scalene triangles can also be used to form corresponding Tetrahedra and Icosahedra in the same way as equilateral triangles.



Any quadrilateral that has two consecutive sides equal can be used to form a Hexahedron and any pentagon that has two consecutive sides equal to (say) a and the next two consecutive sides equal to (say) b, leaving the third side free can be used to form a Tetartoid.



Some of these pentagons have internal angles greater than 360/3 = 120 degrees.



So, I'm not sure we can rule out some sort of irregular hexagons that can be used in this way as well.



What I have here is a list with no obvious way to proceed in terms of verifying that it is exhaustive. Can someone give me a hint as to how I can make progress?










share|cite|improve this question






















  • Hexagons won't do, unless you want a polyhedron with holes.
    – Ivan Neretin
    Nov 20 at 12:18










  • Sure, but how can we prove that?
    – Rohit Pandey
    Nov 20 at 19:16






  • 1




    You may want to research "isohedra".
    – Blue
    Nov 20 at 22:56















up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1












The requirement is that we start with a 2-d polygon and using just copies of this polygon, cobble them together into a closed 3-d polyhedron (no gaps). I want to find a way to identify all such 2-d polygons.



Here are the ones I'm aware of -



All the platonic solids obviously satisfy this requirement. So, the equilateral triangle which can be used to form the Tetrahedron, Octahedron and Icosahedron. Then there is the square which can be used to form the Cube and finally the regular pentagon which can be used to form the Dodecahedron.



Apart from these, scalene triangles can also be used to form corresponding Tetrahedra and Icosahedra in the same way as equilateral triangles.



Any quadrilateral that has two consecutive sides equal can be used to form a Hexahedron and any pentagon that has two consecutive sides equal to (say) a and the next two consecutive sides equal to (say) b, leaving the third side free can be used to form a Tetartoid.



Some of these pentagons have internal angles greater than 360/3 = 120 degrees.



So, I'm not sure we can rule out some sort of irregular hexagons that can be used in this way as well.



What I have here is a list with no obvious way to proceed in terms of verifying that it is exhaustive. Can someone give me a hint as to how I can make progress?










share|cite|improve this question






















  • Hexagons won't do, unless you want a polyhedron with holes.
    – Ivan Neretin
    Nov 20 at 12:18










  • Sure, but how can we prove that?
    – Rohit Pandey
    Nov 20 at 19:16






  • 1




    You may want to research "isohedra".
    – Blue
    Nov 20 at 22:56













up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1






1





The requirement is that we start with a 2-d polygon and using just copies of this polygon, cobble them together into a closed 3-d polyhedron (no gaps). I want to find a way to identify all such 2-d polygons.



Here are the ones I'm aware of -



All the platonic solids obviously satisfy this requirement. So, the equilateral triangle which can be used to form the Tetrahedron, Octahedron and Icosahedron. Then there is the square which can be used to form the Cube and finally the regular pentagon which can be used to form the Dodecahedron.



Apart from these, scalene triangles can also be used to form corresponding Tetrahedra and Icosahedra in the same way as equilateral triangles.



Any quadrilateral that has two consecutive sides equal can be used to form a Hexahedron and any pentagon that has two consecutive sides equal to (say) a and the next two consecutive sides equal to (say) b, leaving the third side free can be used to form a Tetartoid.



Some of these pentagons have internal angles greater than 360/3 = 120 degrees.



So, I'm not sure we can rule out some sort of irregular hexagons that can be used in this way as well.



What I have here is a list with no obvious way to proceed in terms of verifying that it is exhaustive. Can someone give me a hint as to how I can make progress?










share|cite|improve this question













The requirement is that we start with a 2-d polygon and using just copies of this polygon, cobble them together into a closed 3-d polyhedron (no gaps). I want to find a way to identify all such 2-d polygons.



Here are the ones I'm aware of -



All the platonic solids obviously satisfy this requirement. So, the equilateral triangle which can be used to form the Tetrahedron, Octahedron and Icosahedron. Then there is the square which can be used to form the Cube and finally the regular pentagon which can be used to form the Dodecahedron.



Apart from these, scalene triangles can also be used to form corresponding Tetrahedra and Icosahedra in the same way as equilateral triangles.



Any quadrilateral that has two consecutive sides equal can be used to form a Hexahedron and any pentagon that has two consecutive sides equal to (say) a and the next two consecutive sides equal to (say) b, leaving the third side free can be used to form a Tetartoid.



Some of these pentagons have internal angles greater than 360/3 = 120 degrees.



So, I'm not sure we can rule out some sort of irregular hexagons that can be used in this way as well.



What I have here is a list with no obvious way to proceed in terms of verifying that it is exhaustive. Can someone give me a hint as to how I can make progress?







geometry solid-geometry platonic-solids






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Nov 20 at 5:19









Rohit Pandey

949818




949818












  • Hexagons won't do, unless you want a polyhedron with holes.
    – Ivan Neretin
    Nov 20 at 12:18










  • Sure, but how can we prove that?
    – Rohit Pandey
    Nov 20 at 19:16






  • 1




    You may want to research "isohedra".
    – Blue
    Nov 20 at 22:56


















  • Hexagons won't do, unless you want a polyhedron with holes.
    – Ivan Neretin
    Nov 20 at 12:18










  • Sure, but how can we prove that?
    – Rohit Pandey
    Nov 20 at 19:16






  • 1




    You may want to research "isohedra".
    – Blue
    Nov 20 at 22:56
















Hexagons won't do, unless you want a polyhedron with holes.
– Ivan Neretin
Nov 20 at 12:18




Hexagons won't do, unless you want a polyhedron with holes.
– Ivan Neretin
Nov 20 at 12:18












Sure, but how can we prove that?
– Rohit Pandey
Nov 20 at 19:16




Sure, but how can we prove that?
– Rohit Pandey
Nov 20 at 19:16




1




1




You may want to research "isohedra".
– Blue
Nov 20 at 22:56




You may want to research "isohedra".
– Blue
Nov 20 at 22:56










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote













Euler says that for convex polyhedra $V-E+F=2$. Now if every face is a hexagon, by counting all edges in all faces we get $6F$, but in doing so we've counted every edge twice, hence $E=3F$. By similar reasoning, if three faces meet at each vertex, we have $V=2F$. Hence $V-E+F=0$ and not 2, so no luck.



Having more than three faces meeting at some vertices is only going to make things worse. Ditto for introducing hepta-and-even-more-gons.



So it goes.






share|cite|improve this answer





















    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3005971%2fall-the-2-d-polygons-that-can-be-used-to-form-3-d-polyhedrons%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    1
    down vote













    Euler says that for convex polyhedra $V-E+F=2$. Now if every face is a hexagon, by counting all edges in all faces we get $6F$, but in doing so we've counted every edge twice, hence $E=3F$. By similar reasoning, if three faces meet at each vertex, we have $V=2F$. Hence $V-E+F=0$ and not 2, so no luck.



    Having more than three faces meeting at some vertices is only going to make things worse. Ditto for introducing hepta-and-even-more-gons.



    So it goes.






    share|cite|improve this answer

























      up vote
      1
      down vote













      Euler says that for convex polyhedra $V-E+F=2$. Now if every face is a hexagon, by counting all edges in all faces we get $6F$, but in doing so we've counted every edge twice, hence $E=3F$. By similar reasoning, if three faces meet at each vertex, we have $V=2F$. Hence $V-E+F=0$ and not 2, so no luck.



      Having more than three faces meeting at some vertices is only going to make things worse. Ditto for introducing hepta-and-even-more-gons.



      So it goes.






      share|cite|improve this answer























        up vote
        1
        down vote










        up vote
        1
        down vote









        Euler says that for convex polyhedra $V-E+F=2$. Now if every face is a hexagon, by counting all edges in all faces we get $6F$, but in doing so we've counted every edge twice, hence $E=3F$. By similar reasoning, if three faces meet at each vertex, we have $V=2F$. Hence $V-E+F=0$ and not 2, so no luck.



        Having more than three faces meeting at some vertices is only going to make things worse. Ditto for introducing hepta-and-even-more-gons.



        So it goes.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        Euler says that for convex polyhedra $V-E+F=2$. Now if every face is a hexagon, by counting all edges in all faces we get $6F$, but in doing so we've counted every edge twice, hence $E=3F$. By similar reasoning, if three faces meet at each vertex, we have $V=2F$. Hence $V-E+F=0$ and not 2, so no luck.



        Having more than three faces meeting at some vertices is only going to make things worse. Ditto for introducing hepta-and-even-more-gons.



        So it goes.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Nov 20 at 21:54









        Ivan Neretin

        8,76021535




        8,76021535






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3005971%2fall-the-2-d-polygons-that-can-be-used-to-form-3-d-polyhedrons%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Index of /

            Tribalistas

            Listed building