I suspect it is impossible to split a (any) 3d solid into two, such that each of the pieces is identical in shape (but not volume) to the original. How can I prove this?
Asked
Active
Viewed 323 times
7
-
1On a related note: Kimmo Eriksson proves in [The American Mathematical Monthly Vol. 103, No. 5 (May, 1996), pp. 393-400] that a convex polygon is splittable in two properly congruent pieces iff it has rotational symmetry. – Mariano Suárez-Álvarez Sep 07 '10 at 17:16
-
A couple of questions. 1) What exactly does split mean? 2) Why is this tagged topology? – Aryabhata Sep 07 '10 at 17:25
-
1Is this connected to the Banach-Tarski paradox? – Isaac Sep 07 '10 at 18:36
-
Was thinking of a 3d analogue to Pythagoras' Theorem. – Guillermo Phillips Sep 07 '10 at 19:02
-
Isaac, I don't think so, because that paradox involves dividing a sphere into non-spherical pieces. But I am also curious if there are any solutions involving pathological shapes or division methods. – Dan Brumleve Sep 08 '10 at 01:13
2 Answers
9
You can certainly take a rectangular box, $2^{1/3} \times 2^{2/3} \times 2$ and slice it into two boxes of size $1 \times 2^{1/3} \times 2^{2/3}$.
David E Speyer
- 61,724
-
1I'm confused, doesn't this contradict the theorem in the answer Mariano Suárez-Alvarez wrote? – Sep 07 '10 at 18:47
-
-
3
-
-
1Also can we make the pieces different sizes and connect them sideways, like a Golden Rectangle? How many different ways are there to do this in n-space? – Dan Brumleve Sep 08 '10 at 01:37
4
It seems that Puppe and others proved that this is impossible for any strictly convex solid. See [B. L van den Waerden, Aufgabe Nr 51, Elem. Math. 4 (1949) 18, 140]
The reference comes from Unsolved problems in geometry by Hallard T. Croft, K. J. Falconer and Richard K. Guy.
Mariano Suárez-Álvarez
- 135,076
-
4Is it also true that no strictly convex solid can be divided into any two strictly convex pieces, whether or not they are identical with each other or either with the original? – Dan Brumleve Sep 08 '10 at 01:06
-
@Dab, I would imagine that that is true (for at a point where the two pieces touch which is not at the boundary of the original body at most one of them will be strictly convex) – Mariano Suárez-Álvarez Sep 08 '10 at 09:51