In another problem we showed an analogue of this occurs in infinitely many higher dimensions. Ie It is possible to make a regular n-simplex who's vertices all lie on the vertices of a regular n-hypercube. Specifically, one can show that this happens for 7-simplices and 7-hypercubes. I have 2 questions that I have tried to answer but would like to see if anyone gets the same result. SO here are the questions.
How many distinct 7-simplices that have vertices on a 7-hypercube all share at least one common vertex?
How many distinct 7-simplices in total have vertices on a common 7-hypercube?
What's the size of an orbit of a single 7-simplex in the set of all the 7-simplices under the group of the symmetries of the 7-hypercube?
Details and Assumptions:
A regular -dimensional simplex in has vertices that are all an equal distance apart. (It's like an -dimensional version of an equilateral triangle!)
Here is the Wikipedia article on hypercubes. (It's like an -dimensional version of a square!)
Easy Math Editor
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
*italics*
or_italics_
**bold**
or__bold__
paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)
> This is a quote
\(
...\)
or\[
...\]
to ensure proper formatting.2 \times 3
2^{34}
a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta
\boxed{123}
Comments
POSSIBLE SPOILERS :
Answers I got for each question were 5,80,16 respectively for questions 1,2 and 3. If I have time later and anyone asks I'll write down how I got these numbers.
Log in to reply
For question 1, I'm getting an answer of more than 5. However, if it was assumed that all the simplexes would only intersect at 1 vertex, then the answer would be 5, which isn't true (I'm not sure if you made the same assumption as me). What I did was to consider the Hadamard Matrix of order 8. Up to equivalence, it is known that there is only 1 unique Hadamard Matrix for order 8. So to find all the 7-simplex, we only need to consider the rearrangement of the rows for the Hadamard Matrix given by Michael here, which is
H2=⎝⎜⎜⎜⎜⎜⎜⎜⎜⎜⎜⎛0000000000110011010101010110011000001111001111000101101001101001⎠⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟⎞
From here, it is easy to find more than 5 solutions.
Log in to reply
Julian, I think this is a wonderful observation! Thanks so much :)
Update : Found my mistake, I now make it our to be 30 sharing at least one common vertex and 480 simplices in total with 16 still being in a common orbit!
Log in to reply
Log in to reply
Log in to reply
Log in to reply
Nice result checking for other lengths! I expect we can prove that they must all be of this type (eg a fixed amount of 1s in each row given the dimension) by looking at two different formulas for the hypervolume of an n-simplex!
I think this is a super interesting problem to look at it in general- in particular looking at the groups acting on the set of all the simplices in the case where n=11. I suspect one can derive an interesting construction of some of the sporadic simple groups by looking at these simplices in different dimensions!
Glad that you seem to find the problem interesting too! I think I once gave a talk on this and will have the slides somewhere - let me know if you want a copy!
Log in to reply
Log in to reply
I will also aim to start writing a complete account of what I did, dotting the is and crossing the ts this weekend ( I think it'll be good to clarify some thoughts in my head also!)
n=4k−1. My bounding method only works for n<12. I'll work on it during the weekend as that's when my exams end.
In the case where n=11, there are also no 11-simplices that can't be expressed with Hadamard. As of now, I have yet to find a method to prove for allLog in to reply