Crystallography & Symmetry
patterns derived from their groups
Concept

Proof by contradiction — where it appears

An argument that assumes what is to be denied and derives an impossibility, as the shrinking-vector proof does for a fivefold axis. It gives a second, geometric route to a result the trace argument reaches by arithmetic.

Named by 4 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Assuming a 5-fold rotation. The shortest lattice vector, its rotated copies, and the combination of them that is itself a lattice vector. Where that combination comes out shorter than the vector assumed shortest, the assumed rotation cannot exist.

Why five-fold is impossible

A second proof, geometric rather than algebraic: assume a five-fold centre, and out of it construct a lattice vector shorter than the shortest one there is.

restriction · Restriction Every way regular polygons can fill a turn. The seventeen multisets of regular polygons whose interior angles add to exactly 360°, listed with the sum that qualifies each of them. They are found by a search over sizes from three upward: the largest polygon that can appear is the forty-two-gon, which needs a triangle and a heptagon beside it, and the search stops there because the smallest interior angle is a third of a turn so at most six polygons can meet. Nothing here is a table looked up — the list is the output of the search, and every count on the page downstream of it is counted from this one.

Twenty-one vertices, eleven tilings

Regular polygons meeting at a point must fill exactly a turn, which is a Diophantine equation with seventeen answers and twenty-one cyclic arrangements. Ten of the twenty-one tile nothing at all — and the argument that kills them counts places round a polygon rather than measuring anything.

classification · Tilings Modulo 3 injective on all thirteen, modulo 2 on 5. Minkowski's lemma says the kernel of reduction modulo an integer of at least three is torsion-free, so a finite group of integer matrices is carried faithfully into a finite group of matrices over ℤ/3 — which is why the classification is finite, before any bound is computed. The middle column checks it on every finite subgroup of GL(2,ℤ) there is: thirteen classes, no collapses. The right column is the case the lemma has to exclude. Modulo 2, minus the identity is the identity, and 8 classes lose operations.

Reduction modulo three

A finite group of integer matrices survives being reduced modulo three: no two of its operations collide. That single fact proves the classification finite without computing any bound — and modulo two it is false, refuted by the inversion centre.

restriction · Finiteness Identical layers, each turned by an angle no number of turns undoes. Plan views of 4 layers of a stack. Each layer is the same square lattice with one cell shaded and one direction drawn, and each is turned from the one below through the angle whose cosine is three fifths, about 53.13 degrees. That angle is not a rational part of a full turn, so no number of layers brings the drawn direction back to where it started. A tiling of space with this structure has a symmetry that turns one layer onto the next and climbs one layer, and it has no translation.

Aperiodic is two words in space

A tile is aperiodic when none of its tilings is periodic, and periodic has been read two ways: a tiling with a translation, or a tiling with infinitely many symmetries. In the plane those are one condition, provably. In space they come apart, and a prism found in 1988 sits exactly in the gap.

aperiodic · Monotile

Named alongside it

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

DecidabilityDiscretenessEnumerationAperiodicityArchimedean tilingArithmetic crystal classCase analysisCoincidence site latticeEdge to edgeFinite groupGaussian integerHelix

All concepts