Does there exist a derivation that a cube has 6 sides from knowing that a square has 4 edges and $4\choose2$ = 6? I was thinking maybe there exists some bijective map from any 2 given edges of a square to faces of a cube but I'm not really getting anywhere. I was thinking of this 2d --> 3d example, but I imagine if a derivation exists for this it could inductively find the number of externally touching distinct sides of a straight-edged shape (e.g. a line, square, cube, etc.) for higher dimesnions too. When looking at lower dimensions, though, a line has 2 edge facing sides but $\not\exists{x}$ s.t. $2\choose{x}$ $={4}$, so maybe you can only start the induction from the 2nd dimension? I'm pretty lost so any help would be greatly appreciated. As for my background, I've taken a class on algebra but don't have any topology knowledge, so I apologize in advance if this question is rudimentary. Thanks!
-
1I don't think there is enough information. What is the definition of a "cube" in your problem? – Andrei Feb 12 '23 at 15:18
-
4I think $6=\binom{4}{2}$ is just a coincidence here. The connection is instead $6=4+2$. In general an $n$-dimensional cube has $2n$ facets (for each of the $n$ directions, there's a facet on each of two ends of the cube). – Eric Wofsey Feb 12 '23 at 15:19
-
1@Andrei Are you seriously claiming that you don't know what a cube is? – MJD Feb 12 '23 at 15:40
-
2@MJD I know what a cube is. But depending on the definition there will be different methods to prove the number of sides. – Andrei Feb 12 '23 at 15:57
-
2I thought of another answer, which you might enjoy. I wrote it up on my blog. – MJD Feb 21 '23 at 05:27
2 Answers
You totally can. Consider the expression $$p + s + p$$ which is a sort of combinatorial description of a line segment. It has a point at one end, then the segment part, then another point at the other end. We can combine the like terms to get $$s + 2p$$ which tells us it has two endpoints, and one segment.
Now let's square that: $$(s+2p)^2 = s^2 + 4ps + 4p^2 $$
That's a square! The $s^2$ is the square itself, because $s^2$ is a segment squared. The $4ps$ is the four sides because a point times a segment is just a segment. The $4p^2$ is the four vertices because a point times a point is just a point.
(If that bugs you, just set $p=1$ so that it reduces to $s^2 +4s^1 + 4s^0$, and it still counts the number of parts: one two-dimensional square, four one-dimensional sides, and four zero-dimensional vertices.)
Now let's do a cube: $$(s+2p)^3 = s^3 + 6ps^2 + 12p^2s + 8p^3$$
There's your cube: the $s^3$ is the interior part. The $6ps^2$ is the six faces. The $12p^2s$ is the twelve edges. The $8p^3$ is the eight vertices.
And yes, this works for higher-dimensional cubes also.
You can use the binomial theorem to count the number of parts of an n-cube: since
$$ \begin{align} (s+2p)^n & =\sum_{k=0}^n \binom nk s^{n-k}(2p)^k \\ & = \binom n0 s^n + \binom n1 2s^{n-1}p + \binom n2 4s^{n-2}p^2 + \dots + \binom n{n-1}2^{n-1}sp^{n-1} + \binom nn2^np^n\\ \end{align} $$
this tells you that the number of $k$-dimensional components is the coefficient of the $s^k$ term, which is $$\binom n{n-k}2^{n-k}.$$
Since it's just the binomial theorem, it connects with Pascal's triangle also; Pascal's triangle is nothing but a tabular representation of the binomial coefficients $\binom nk$. We can tabulate these cube coefficients the same way:
$$ 1\\ 1\quad 2 \\ 1\quad 4 \quad 4 \\ 1\quad 6 \quad 12 \quad 8 \\ \vdots $$
Here the rule is that each number is the sum of the number above and to the right, and twice the number above and to the left.
- 65,394
- 39
- 298
- 580
-
-
Some but not so much. Most polytopes have a less regular structure. You can do something like this for any prism (a triangular prism is a product of a triangle $3p+3s+t$ and a segment $2p+s$) and something like it for pyramids and cross-polytopes (octahedra etc). But if it worked for, say, dodecahedra you'd expect there to be higher-dimensional analogs of the dodecahedron, and there aren't, so it can't. – MJD Feb 12 '23 at 16:26
-
brilliant answer! Is there any way we can extend this into tetrahedrons, pyramids and prisms? – D S Feb 12 '23 at 16:47
-
This is some fancy formula wizardry, but I'd not call that a proof. – Paŭlo Ebermann Feb 13 '23 at 00:08
-
-
6My answer does not claim to be a proof of anything, and the question did not ask for a proof. But the relationship I showed is certainly not a coincidence! It is a straightforward and typical application of generating functions. – MJD Feb 13 '23 at 04:27
-
2@MJD is completely right, I wasn't looking for a proof just a cool derivation—which is exactly what this is! Thank you for an absolutely amazing answer, it provides great intuition to the relationship between points/edges/faces through the dimensions via a super unique combinatoric method, very very cool!! I'll definitely take a further look into generating functions, thanks again:D – aj26 Feb 13 '23 at 12:56
-
2Thanks, I am glad I could give you what you wanted. Concrete Mathematics by Graham et al has a chapter on generating functions that you might enjoy. – MJD Feb 13 '23 at 13:27
Your question is rudimentary in some sense, but nonetheless very interesting.
I think you should start with triangles and their generalizations before moving on to squares and cubes.
Imagine a triangle in the plane (with $3$ vertices and $3$ edges). Pick a fourth point in space (not in that triangle's plane) and join it to the vertices of the original triangle. You have built a tetrahedron, with counts $(3+1, 3+3, 1+3) = (4,6,4)$ for (vertices, edges, triangles). If you now join everything to a new point in the next (fourth) dimension you see counts $(5,10,10,5)$ for (points, edges, triangles, tetrahedra). You can continue this recursive construction. The counts form the rows of Pascal's triangle.
That is even clearer if you start the argument from dimension $0$, where the figure is a single point. Then adding a point on a line leads to $(2,1)$ for (points,edges). The next step gets you to the triangle. There is a good argument for including a $1$ at the beginning to make the connection to Pascal's triangle even clearer.
To build a square from a line segment you slide it parallel to itself in the plane. That turns the counts $(2,1)$ for (points, edges) to $(4,4,1)$ for (points, edges, squares). Sliding the square into space leads to counts $$ \text{(points, edges, squares, cubes)} = (4+4, 4+4+4, 4+2,1) = (8,12,6,1). $$ You can continue this on through the dimensions.
- 95,224
- 7
- 108
- 199