Crystallography & Symmetry
patterns derived from their groups
Concept

Census — where it appears

An exhaustive enumeration of every object of a stated kind inside a stated bound, divided by an equivalence and counted. It answers what a typical member of a family is like, which a collection of chosen examples cannot: the members it produces were not selected for having anything to show.

Named by 10 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

One vertex, two edges: one net. Three edges: no answer at all. Every net with one vertex and the stated number of edges, counted inside boxes of voltages of three sizes, up to change of basis and the sign of an edge. Two edges give one net whatever the box, and the reason is a sentence: two voltages that generate the translations are a basis of ℤ², and every basis is carried to every other. Three edges give more nets in every larger box, and that is not a failure of the search — normalise two of the voltages to a basis and the third is a free pair of integers, so the family is infinite. An enumeration inside a bound reports which of those two situations it is in rather than reporting the count it happened to reach.

Every net with one vertex, counted

A net is a few vertices, a few edges and a pair of integers on each, so a census is available: fix the numbers, bound the integers, enumerate. Two edges give exactly one net at every bound. Three give three, then nineteen, then a hundred and forty-three — and the question changes.

applied · Nets Two vertices and three edges: two nets, at every box size tried. Every net with two quotient vertices and the stated number of edges, counted inside boxes of voltages of several sizes. One cross voltage is set to zero by the gauge — the freedom that moving one vertex into another cell gives — and the rest are drawn from the box. Each entry is the count of nets whose placement separates their vertices, plus the count of those whose does not: the first has a canonical description and stops growing, and the second does not have one and therefore keeps rising with the box. The reducible column is the descriptions thrown away for a reason the one-vertex census never had — cycles generating the whole of ℤ² and a net whose own cell holds one vertex rather than two — and it is empty at every odd edge count, because the swap that would reduce a description pairs its edges and an odd number cannot pair.

Every net with two vertices, counted

The one-vertex census could not contain the honeycomb, because the honeycomb has two vertices in its cell. Adding the second one closes a family at two nets, removes the floor of p2 entirely, makes a third of the members undrawable, and forces the census to refuse a kind of description the first one never met: an honest quotient graph written on twice the cell it needs.

applied · Nets Four of the 980 piles in a three-cube box. A stack of unit cubes in the corner of a box, seen down the body diagonal. Every visible face is one of three rhombi and the picture is a tiling of one fixed hexagon — the same hexagon for every pile, because a pile in an a×b×c box always shows ab+bc+ca faces however it is stacked. The four here are taken at even intervals through the enumeration, from the empty box to the full one.

A facet with no energy in it

Stack cubes into the corner of a box and look down the body diagonal: the pile is a tiling of a hexagon by three rhombi, and the number of piles is a product MacMahon wrote down in 1916. Because the count is exact, so is the average pile — and the average has a flat corner meeting a rounded middle, which is the shape of an equilibrium crystal, arrived at by counting with no surface energy anywhere in the argument.

aperiodic · Entropy The parity argument loses 36 pairs it had won alone. The argument that refutes ten of the twenty-one species walks round a polygon of odd size: the ring of polygons about it is a closed walk of odd length in a graph the species decides, and a bipartite graph has no such walk. With two species at a vertex the flanking pairs come from the union of two graphs, and a union of bipartite graphs need not be bipartite — so the walk stops being constrained. The fourth row is the cost: pairs whose members the argument kills on their own and which it cannot kill together.

The argument that closes eleven

Twenty-one vertex species satisfy the angle equation; a parity argument kills ten before anything is drawn, and the eleven survivors are all built. Asking the same question of tilings with two kinds of vertex, the parity argument evaporates — it constrains a walk in a graph one species decides, and two species decide the union of two graphs, which need not be bipartite. What is left is a search, and a search cannot close a count.

classification · Decidability Every vector realised, and not at the same hexagon count. Each row is a set of faces other than hexagons whose charge — the sum of 6 − k over them — comes to twelve, which is what a closed trivalent net on the sphere must pay. Each column is a number of hexagons added to that set, and the entry is how many different solids exist with exactly those faces, found by winding up every arrangement of them into a spiral. A dash means the search found none; a question mark means the planar reader declined the row and it is not evidence either way. Every row has an entry somewhere, which is Eberhard's theorem, and the first one is at 0, 2, 3, 4 hexagons depending on the row — so the charge decides everything except the number of hexagons, and the number of hexagons is not a function of the charge.

Everything except the hexagons

Three counts of what a closed net must carry end on the same admission: an arithmetic saying what a net must charge does not say that a net exists. Eberhard's theorem says how close the charge comes to being enough, and the answer has a shape nobody would guess — it fixes every face count except the hexagons, and the hexagons are exactly the entry it cannot see.

restriction · Curvature The fewest contacts twelve pentagons can have, by size. For every cage of pentagons and hexagons up to forty-four atoms, the number of pairs of pentagons sharing a bond. The lower line is the fewest any cage of that size achieves — 30, 24, 21, 18, 17, 15, 14, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8 — the upper line the most, and the dashed line the bound that counting edges gives: the twelve pentagons carry sixty edges between them, a contact uses two and an edge to a hexagon uses one, so the contacts cannot fall below 30 − 3h with h hexagons. The bound is attained while the hexagons are few and goes loose at five, after which each extra hexagon removes about one contact rather than three. The number of cages at each size is printed beneath, and it is the least rather than the average that the bound is about.

How close the twelve must be

The charge fixes twelve pentagons and says nothing about where they go, because it is a sum over faces and cannot see which face touches which. What it cannot see is a graph on twelve points, and the fewest edges that graph can have falls from thirty to eight over the cages a census reaches — then keeps falling at a rate that puts its first zero exactly where the truncated icosahedron is.

restriction · Curvature Two, seventeen, two hundred and thirty, and then. The number of arithmetic crystal classes and the number of crystallographic groups in each of the first six dimensions, with the second divided by the first. The classes multiply by between five and fourteen a dimension; the groups multiply by much more, and the quotient — how many groups an average class carries — goes 1.00, 1.31, 3.15, 6.74, 36.5 and 339. The last column says what is derived on this page and what is quoted: the plane in full, six of the seventy-three classes in space, and nothing at all above three dimensions, where the counts come from machine enumerations of the 1970s onwards.

Finitely many is not few

Bieberbach's third theorem says each dimension holds finitely many crystallographic groups and gives no idea how many. The counts are 2, 17, 230, 4783, 222018 and 28927922, and dividing them by the number of arithmetic classes says which of the classification's three steps supplies the explosion — the step that attaches translations, not the one that finds the matrix groups.

restriction · Finiteness Every arrangement on a torus 4 across, sorted by defects. The transfer matrix that counts ice arrangements chooses, at each vertex, the one horizontal arrow the rule permits. Enumerating both choices instead and carrying a polynomial that records how many vertices end up with three arrows in or three out gives the number of arrangements at every defect count at once. The first column, drawn solid, is the ice count — 2970 arrangements with no defect at all, which is the number the earlier transfer matrix gives and is checked against it. The second column is empty: no arrangement has exactly one defective vertex, because a defect carries a charge and the charges on a closed surface must cancel. The columns together add to two raised to the number of edges, which is every assignment of arrows whatever.

What a defect costs the count

Each broken vertex relaxes the rule and so adds arrangements — the question left standing was whether each adds a fixed amount or the cloud around it costs some back. The exact count at every defect number at once answers both halves: almost all of the rise is the freedom to choose which vertices break, and with that removed the first defects subtract rather than add.

aperiodic · Entropy One rule, one lattice, two entropies. The number of arrangements per vertex for square ice, counted two ways on the same lattice with the same rule. On a torus the count falls towards Lieb's exact value of 1.5396 from above. Inside a domain wall — every arrow on the top and bottom edges pointing in, every arrow on the left and right pointing out — the count rises towards 3√3/4, which is 1.2990, from below. A residual entropy is supposed to be a bulk quantity that forgets the boundary; these two differ by sixteen per cent and the only difference between them is the boundary.

The count that depends on the edge

A residual entropy is supposed to be a bulk number: so much per vertex, whatever surrounds the lattice. Square ice has two of them. On a torus the count per vertex heads for 1.5396 and inside a domain wall it heads for 1.2990, with the same rule on the same lattice — and the sixteen per cent between them is sitting in the corners.

aperiodic · Entropy A colouring, and the arrows it writes. A proper three-colouring of the cells of a four-by-four torus — no two cells sharing an edge carry the same colour — with an arrow drawn on each shared edge by the difference of the two colours it separates. The difference is one or two modulo three, never nought, so every edge gets a direction. At each corner four cells meet and their four differences go round a cycle and add to nothing modulo three, which forces two of the arrows in and two out. That is the ice rule, arrived at from a colouring with no arrows in its statement.

Three colours on a chessboard

Colour the cells of a board in three colours so that no two sharing an edge agree. The number of ways is the number of ice arrangements on the same board — the same integer, to the last digit, at every even size — so a residual entropy a calorimeter reads is also the answer to a colouring problem with no physics in it at all. At odd sizes the two counts part company, and why they do is a condition on going round.

aperiodic · Entropy

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

CountingEnumerationEntropyLocal rulesTransfer matrixGraph isomorphismHeight functionResidual entropyBarycentric placementChange of basisCombinatorial curvatureCrystal net

All concepts