Generating, or counting the sides of, “square-like” polygons (with all congruent sides, and all angles...












2












$begingroup$


What are some of the polygons that have all congruent sides and all angles $90^circ$ or $270^circ$? Is there a pattern for generating these, or a formula for the number of sides? These don't have to be convex (as the $270^circ$ angle shows).



Also, the shapes can only have 2 line segments extending from each vertex.



I know a square is one, and a plus sign-like shape, but I am looking for something more general, like a pattern.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Can vertices coincide? E.g. do you allow a polygon whose corners angles are 90-90-90-270-90-90-90-270? Or one where two convex corners touch?
    $endgroup$
    – Henning Makholm
    Jan 12 at 17:33








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    If I understand you correctly, these are a subset of the polyominoes. If you really want all the sides to be congruent, it will be a very small subset. I can think offhand of one with 9 sides and one with 12.
    $endgroup$
    – MJD
    Jan 12 at 17:34












  • $begingroup$
    @HenningMakholm I don't think it counts as a polygon if it self-intersects.
    $endgroup$
    – Frpzzd
    Jan 12 at 17:41










  • $begingroup$
    For "sides" read "squares". They have 20 and 24 sides respectively. There is also one with 13 squares and 20 sides.
    $endgroup$
    – MJD
    Jan 12 at 17:41












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for an interesting and fun question!
    $endgroup$
    – timtfj
    Jan 15 at 1:53
















2












$begingroup$


What are some of the polygons that have all congruent sides and all angles $90^circ$ or $270^circ$? Is there a pattern for generating these, or a formula for the number of sides? These don't have to be convex (as the $270^circ$ angle shows).



Also, the shapes can only have 2 line segments extending from each vertex.



I know a square is one, and a plus sign-like shape, but I am looking for something more general, like a pattern.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Can vertices coincide? E.g. do you allow a polygon whose corners angles are 90-90-90-270-90-90-90-270? Or one where two convex corners touch?
    $endgroup$
    – Henning Makholm
    Jan 12 at 17:33








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    If I understand you correctly, these are a subset of the polyominoes. If you really want all the sides to be congruent, it will be a very small subset. I can think offhand of one with 9 sides and one with 12.
    $endgroup$
    – MJD
    Jan 12 at 17:34












  • $begingroup$
    @HenningMakholm I don't think it counts as a polygon if it self-intersects.
    $endgroup$
    – Frpzzd
    Jan 12 at 17:41










  • $begingroup$
    For "sides" read "squares". They have 20 and 24 sides respectively. There is also one with 13 squares and 20 sides.
    $endgroup$
    – MJD
    Jan 12 at 17:41












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for an interesting and fun question!
    $endgroup$
    – timtfj
    Jan 15 at 1:53














2












2








2





$begingroup$


What are some of the polygons that have all congruent sides and all angles $90^circ$ or $270^circ$? Is there a pattern for generating these, or a formula for the number of sides? These don't have to be convex (as the $270^circ$ angle shows).



Also, the shapes can only have 2 line segments extending from each vertex.



I know a square is one, and a plus sign-like shape, but I am looking for something more general, like a pattern.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




What are some of the polygons that have all congruent sides and all angles $90^circ$ or $270^circ$? Is there a pattern for generating these, or a formula for the number of sides? These don't have to be convex (as the $270^circ$ angle shows).



Also, the shapes can only have 2 line segments extending from each vertex.



I know a square is one, and a plus sign-like shape, but I am looking for something more general, like a pattern.







geometry






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jan 13 at 0:27









Blue

49.1k870156




49.1k870156










asked Jan 12 at 17:28









mathboy1296mathboy1296

235




235








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Can vertices coincide? E.g. do you allow a polygon whose corners angles are 90-90-90-270-90-90-90-270? Or one where two convex corners touch?
    $endgroup$
    – Henning Makholm
    Jan 12 at 17:33








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    If I understand you correctly, these are a subset of the polyominoes. If you really want all the sides to be congruent, it will be a very small subset. I can think offhand of one with 9 sides and one with 12.
    $endgroup$
    – MJD
    Jan 12 at 17:34












  • $begingroup$
    @HenningMakholm I don't think it counts as a polygon if it self-intersects.
    $endgroup$
    – Frpzzd
    Jan 12 at 17:41










  • $begingroup$
    For "sides" read "squares". They have 20 and 24 sides respectively. There is also one with 13 squares and 20 sides.
    $endgroup$
    – MJD
    Jan 12 at 17:41












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for an interesting and fun question!
    $endgroup$
    – timtfj
    Jan 15 at 1:53














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Can vertices coincide? E.g. do you allow a polygon whose corners angles are 90-90-90-270-90-90-90-270? Or one where two convex corners touch?
    $endgroup$
    – Henning Makholm
    Jan 12 at 17:33








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    If I understand you correctly, these are a subset of the polyominoes. If you really want all the sides to be congruent, it will be a very small subset. I can think offhand of one with 9 sides and one with 12.
    $endgroup$
    – MJD
    Jan 12 at 17:34












  • $begingroup$
    @HenningMakholm I don't think it counts as a polygon if it self-intersects.
    $endgroup$
    – Frpzzd
    Jan 12 at 17:41










  • $begingroup$
    For "sides" read "squares". They have 20 and 24 sides respectively. There is also one with 13 squares and 20 sides.
    $endgroup$
    – MJD
    Jan 12 at 17:41












  • $begingroup$
    Thanks for an interesting and fun question!
    $endgroup$
    – timtfj
    Jan 15 at 1:53








1




1




$begingroup$
Can vertices coincide? E.g. do you allow a polygon whose corners angles are 90-90-90-270-90-90-90-270? Or one where two convex corners touch?
$endgroup$
– Henning Makholm
Jan 12 at 17:33






$begingroup$
Can vertices coincide? E.g. do you allow a polygon whose corners angles are 90-90-90-270-90-90-90-270? Or one where two convex corners touch?
$endgroup$
– Henning Makholm
Jan 12 at 17:33






1




1




$begingroup$
If I understand you correctly, these are a subset of the polyominoes. If you really want all the sides to be congruent, it will be a very small subset. I can think offhand of one with 9 sides and one with 12.
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jan 12 at 17:34






$begingroup$
If I understand you correctly, these are a subset of the polyominoes. If you really want all the sides to be congruent, it will be a very small subset. I can think offhand of one with 9 sides and one with 12.
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jan 12 at 17:34














$begingroup$
@HenningMakholm I don't think it counts as a polygon if it self-intersects.
$endgroup$
– Frpzzd
Jan 12 at 17:41




$begingroup$
@HenningMakholm I don't think it counts as a polygon if it self-intersects.
$endgroup$
– Frpzzd
Jan 12 at 17:41












$begingroup$
For "sides" read "squares". They have 20 and 24 sides respectively. There is also one with 13 squares and 20 sides.
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jan 12 at 17:41






$begingroup$
For "sides" read "squares". They have 20 and 24 sides respectively. There is also one with 13 squares and 20 sides.
$endgroup$
– MJD
Jan 12 at 17:41














$begingroup$
Thanks for an interesting and fun question!
$endgroup$
– timtfj
Jan 15 at 1:53




$begingroup$
Thanks for an interesting and fun question!
$endgroup$
– timtfj
Jan 15 at 1:53










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















4












$begingroup$

Edit: I've added a proof that the $8$-sided polygon can't exist.





Number of edges



Not an actual formula for the number of edges, but a proof that:




The number of edges is always a multiple of $4$.




Travelling anticlockwise around the perimeter of the polygon, assign to each edge one of {up, down, left, right} according to the direction of travel along that edge.



It's clear that vertical and horizontal edges must alternate, since two vertical/horizontal edges in succession either make a longer edge or place one edge on top of the other, neither of which is alllowed.



Let $U, D, L, R$ be the number of edges with the directions up, down, left and right respectively.



In order to return to our starting point both vertically and horizontally, we require $$U=D$$ and $$L=R.$$



There are $U+D$ vertical edges and $L+R$ horizontal edges. But every horizontal edge is preceded by a vertical adge and vice versa, so $$U+D=L+R.$$



Together, these requirements imply



$$U=D=L=R=k.$$



The total number of edges is



$$U+D+L+R=4k,$$



and therefore a multiple of $4$.



Constructing the polygons



This is now looking like a combinatorics problem. For a given integer $k$, we must generate permutations of the four edge directions such that:




  • each direction occurs $k$ times.

  • vertical and horizontal directions alternate.

  • no section of the path (considering the whole path as a loop) may contain the same number of up, down, left and right edges.


The last of of these is to prevent the path from returning to a previously visited point before it's complete.



I think these requirements guarantee that every permutation generates a valid polygon, and that all valid polygons are generated (with a lot of repeats).



Number of vertices of each type



Consider the exterior angle at each vertex as we follow an anticlockwise path. This is $90°$ for a vertex where we turn left, and $-90°$ for one where we turn right. We need to have made one full rotation when we return to the starting point: that is, the sum of all the exterior angles must be $360°$.



There must therefore be four more vertices where we turn left than ones where we turn right: or in terms of the internal angles, $4$ more $90°$ vertices than $270°$ ones.



For the case where there are $4k$ vertices, let $n$ be the number of $270°$ vertices. Then there are $n+4$ $90°$ vertices, giving $2n+4$ vertices altogether. So we have



$$2n+4=4k,$$



from which



$$n=2(k-1)$$



Therefore




A $4k$-sided polygon of this type has $2(k-1)$ $270°$ vertices and $2(k+1)$ $90°$ vertices.




Impossibility of the 8-sided polygon



Suppose one of these polygons has $8$ sides. From the above, it has six $90°$ vertices and two $270°$ vertices. How are these arranged as we travel round the polygon?



First note that three vertices of the same type in succession—corresponding to three left or right turns—takes us round a small square. This is only OK if the small square is the entire polygon. So for $k>1$, no more than two vertices of the same type may occur in succession.



So each of the two $270°$ vertices can be followed by at most two $90°$ ones. But this only allows the polygon to have four $90°$ vertices, and it needs to have six.



Therefore




The 8-sided polygon cannot exist.




A similar argument shows that




The only $12$-sided polygon is the cross shape.




For this one we have $k=3$, giving $8$ vertices of one type and $4$ of the other. Denoting the two types as $L$ for a left turn ($90°$) and $R$ for a right turn ($270°$), the only possible sequence is $RLLRLLRLLRLL$, which generates the cross shape. Every $R$ has to be followed by $LL$, to avoid having three $L$'s in succession.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Together with the simple square and the diagonal arrangement of overlapping crosses in Frpzzd's answer, this is enough to show that polygons of $4k$ sides are possible for $k=1$ and for all $kgeq 3$. But it's bedtime and I'm having trouble posting, so I'll leave that for now.
    $endgroup$
    – timtfj
    Jan 15 at 1:37










  • $begingroup$
    Only for those values of $k$, that is. Every positive $k$ except $2$.
    $endgroup$
    – timtfj
    Jan 15 at 1:49





















1












$begingroup$

Here are a few interesting infinite families of polygons satisfying your requirements. One way to generalize your "plus-sign" example is to attach many of these together to form a long chain of them, like this:



enter image description here



The $n$th polygon in this sequence of polygons has $8n+4$ sides. You can also attach the plus-signs to each other like this:



enter image description here



The $n$th polygon in this sequence will have $4n+8$ sides, if you choose the ordinary "plus-sign" polygon as the first member of the sequence. You can also combine polygons from either of these families to create monstrosities like this:



enter image description here



This reasoning will lead to @HenningMakholm's conclusion that any shape created can be made by attaching these "plus-sign" polygons to each other.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Is there any way to generalize both of these families (in terms of a number of sides formula)? Oscar Lanzi had 4n+4. Is that the most general that these polyominos can get to?
    $endgroup$
    – mathboy1296
    Jan 12 at 18:57










  • $begingroup$
    Actually Imistyped. I get only 8n+4. Will edit my answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Oscar Lanzi
    Jan 14 at 0:57



















0












$begingroup$

I think the polygons you can make in this way are exactly:




  • A square


  • Any connected shape without holes that can be made by selecting some of the white squares on an infinite checkerboard and placing a "plus sign" centered on each selected square. (The arms of neighboring plus signs will overlap).







share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    0












    $begingroup$

    There are infinitely many of them. You can generate an infinite subset by building on a single square.



    Start with the one square. Attach four more, congruent squares one on each side, getting your "plus sign". Note that this figure has four 270° corners located at the corners of the first square. Place another square play each of these concavoties, filling in the space around that point, then add four more squares on the outernost edges of the +sign you had. You now have a figure containing 20 sides and vertices, with eight of the vertices concave. Note that these concave vertices had been the 90° corners of the previous + sign.



    You can keep going. At each stage put a square in each concave corner and then squares on the outer edges of the latest figure to get the next figure. After $n$ iterations there are $4(2n+1)$ sides, the same number of vertices, and $4n$ of these vertices having 270° angles.



    As mentioned, this is only a subset of the possibilities. Others will likely post more.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      I don't think you can get all instances of $4(n+1)$: it is not possible to have $8$ sides. All multiples of $4$ from $12$ upwards can be realized by diagonal sequences of pluses, though.
      $endgroup$
      – Henning Makholm
      Jan 14 at 0:32











    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3071149%2fgenerating-or-counting-the-sides-of-square-like-polygons-with-all-congruent%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    4












    $begingroup$

    Edit: I've added a proof that the $8$-sided polygon can't exist.





    Number of edges



    Not an actual formula for the number of edges, but a proof that:




    The number of edges is always a multiple of $4$.




    Travelling anticlockwise around the perimeter of the polygon, assign to each edge one of {up, down, left, right} according to the direction of travel along that edge.



    It's clear that vertical and horizontal edges must alternate, since two vertical/horizontal edges in succession either make a longer edge or place one edge on top of the other, neither of which is alllowed.



    Let $U, D, L, R$ be the number of edges with the directions up, down, left and right respectively.



    In order to return to our starting point both vertically and horizontally, we require $$U=D$$ and $$L=R.$$



    There are $U+D$ vertical edges and $L+R$ horizontal edges. But every horizontal edge is preceded by a vertical adge and vice versa, so $$U+D=L+R.$$



    Together, these requirements imply



    $$U=D=L=R=k.$$



    The total number of edges is



    $$U+D+L+R=4k,$$



    and therefore a multiple of $4$.



    Constructing the polygons



    This is now looking like a combinatorics problem. For a given integer $k$, we must generate permutations of the four edge directions such that:




    • each direction occurs $k$ times.

    • vertical and horizontal directions alternate.

    • no section of the path (considering the whole path as a loop) may contain the same number of up, down, left and right edges.


    The last of of these is to prevent the path from returning to a previously visited point before it's complete.



    I think these requirements guarantee that every permutation generates a valid polygon, and that all valid polygons are generated (with a lot of repeats).



    Number of vertices of each type



    Consider the exterior angle at each vertex as we follow an anticlockwise path. This is $90°$ for a vertex where we turn left, and $-90°$ for one where we turn right. We need to have made one full rotation when we return to the starting point: that is, the sum of all the exterior angles must be $360°$.



    There must therefore be four more vertices where we turn left than ones where we turn right: or in terms of the internal angles, $4$ more $90°$ vertices than $270°$ ones.



    For the case where there are $4k$ vertices, let $n$ be the number of $270°$ vertices. Then there are $n+4$ $90°$ vertices, giving $2n+4$ vertices altogether. So we have



    $$2n+4=4k,$$



    from which



    $$n=2(k-1)$$



    Therefore




    A $4k$-sided polygon of this type has $2(k-1)$ $270°$ vertices and $2(k+1)$ $90°$ vertices.




    Impossibility of the 8-sided polygon



    Suppose one of these polygons has $8$ sides. From the above, it has six $90°$ vertices and two $270°$ vertices. How are these arranged as we travel round the polygon?



    First note that three vertices of the same type in succession—corresponding to three left or right turns—takes us round a small square. This is only OK if the small square is the entire polygon. So for $k>1$, no more than two vertices of the same type may occur in succession.



    So each of the two $270°$ vertices can be followed by at most two $90°$ ones. But this only allows the polygon to have four $90°$ vertices, and it needs to have six.



    Therefore




    The 8-sided polygon cannot exist.




    A similar argument shows that




    The only $12$-sided polygon is the cross shape.




    For this one we have $k=3$, giving $8$ vertices of one type and $4$ of the other. Denoting the two types as $L$ for a left turn ($90°$) and $R$ for a right turn ($270°$), the only possible sequence is $RLLRLLRLLRLL$, which generates the cross shape. Every $R$ has to be followed by $LL$, to avoid having three $L$'s in succession.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Together with the simple square and the diagonal arrangement of overlapping crosses in Frpzzd's answer, this is enough to show that polygons of $4k$ sides are possible for $k=1$ and for all $kgeq 3$. But it's bedtime and I'm having trouble posting, so I'll leave that for now.
      $endgroup$
      – timtfj
      Jan 15 at 1:37










    • $begingroup$
      Only for those values of $k$, that is. Every positive $k$ except $2$.
      $endgroup$
      – timtfj
      Jan 15 at 1:49


















    4












    $begingroup$

    Edit: I've added a proof that the $8$-sided polygon can't exist.





    Number of edges



    Not an actual formula for the number of edges, but a proof that:




    The number of edges is always a multiple of $4$.




    Travelling anticlockwise around the perimeter of the polygon, assign to each edge one of {up, down, left, right} according to the direction of travel along that edge.



    It's clear that vertical and horizontal edges must alternate, since two vertical/horizontal edges in succession either make a longer edge or place one edge on top of the other, neither of which is alllowed.



    Let $U, D, L, R$ be the number of edges with the directions up, down, left and right respectively.



    In order to return to our starting point both vertically and horizontally, we require $$U=D$$ and $$L=R.$$



    There are $U+D$ vertical edges and $L+R$ horizontal edges. But every horizontal edge is preceded by a vertical adge and vice versa, so $$U+D=L+R.$$



    Together, these requirements imply



    $$U=D=L=R=k.$$



    The total number of edges is



    $$U+D+L+R=4k,$$



    and therefore a multiple of $4$.



    Constructing the polygons



    This is now looking like a combinatorics problem. For a given integer $k$, we must generate permutations of the four edge directions such that:




    • each direction occurs $k$ times.

    • vertical and horizontal directions alternate.

    • no section of the path (considering the whole path as a loop) may contain the same number of up, down, left and right edges.


    The last of of these is to prevent the path from returning to a previously visited point before it's complete.



    I think these requirements guarantee that every permutation generates a valid polygon, and that all valid polygons are generated (with a lot of repeats).



    Number of vertices of each type



    Consider the exterior angle at each vertex as we follow an anticlockwise path. This is $90°$ for a vertex where we turn left, and $-90°$ for one where we turn right. We need to have made one full rotation when we return to the starting point: that is, the sum of all the exterior angles must be $360°$.



    There must therefore be four more vertices where we turn left than ones where we turn right: or in terms of the internal angles, $4$ more $90°$ vertices than $270°$ ones.



    For the case where there are $4k$ vertices, let $n$ be the number of $270°$ vertices. Then there are $n+4$ $90°$ vertices, giving $2n+4$ vertices altogether. So we have



    $$2n+4=4k,$$



    from which



    $$n=2(k-1)$$



    Therefore




    A $4k$-sided polygon of this type has $2(k-1)$ $270°$ vertices and $2(k+1)$ $90°$ vertices.




    Impossibility of the 8-sided polygon



    Suppose one of these polygons has $8$ sides. From the above, it has six $90°$ vertices and two $270°$ vertices. How are these arranged as we travel round the polygon?



    First note that three vertices of the same type in succession—corresponding to three left or right turns—takes us round a small square. This is only OK if the small square is the entire polygon. So for $k>1$, no more than two vertices of the same type may occur in succession.



    So each of the two $270°$ vertices can be followed by at most two $90°$ ones. But this only allows the polygon to have four $90°$ vertices, and it needs to have six.



    Therefore




    The 8-sided polygon cannot exist.




    A similar argument shows that




    The only $12$-sided polygon is the cross shape.




    For this one we have $k=3$, giving $8$ vertices of one type and $4$ of the other. Denoting the two types as $L$ for a left turn ($90°$) and $R$ for a right turn ($270°$), the only possible sequence is $RLLRLLRLLRLL$, which generates the cross shape. Every $R$ has to be followed by $LL$, to avoid having three $L$'s in succession.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Together with the simple square and the diagonal arrangement of overlapping crosses in Frpzzd's answer, this is enough to show that polygons of $4k$ sides are possible for $k=1$ and for all $kgeq 3$. But it's bedtime and I'm having trouble posting, so I'll leave that for now.
      $endgroup$
      – timtfj
      Jan 15 at 1:37










    • $begingroup$
      Only for those values of $k$, that is. Every positive $k$ except $2$.
      $endgroup$
      – timtfj
      Jan 15 at 1:49
















    4












    4








    4





    $begingroup$

    Edit: I've added a proof that the $8$-sided polygon can't exist.





    Number of edges



    Not an actual formula for the number of edges, but a proof that:




    The number of edges is always a multiple of $4$.




    Travelling anticlockwise around the perimeter of the polygon, assign to each edge one of {up, down, left, right} according to the direction of travel along that edge.



    It's clear that vertical and horizontal edges must alternate, since two vertical/horizontal edges in succession either make a longer edge or place one edge on top of the other, neither of which is alllowed.



    Let $U, D, L, R$ be the number of edges with the directions up, down, left and right respectively.



    In order to return to our starting point both vertically and horizontally, we require $$U=D$$ and $$L=R.$$



    There are $U+D$ vertical edges and $L+R$ horizontal edges. But every horizontal edge is preceded by a vertical adge and vice versa, so $$U+D=L+R.$$



    Together, these requirements imply



    $$U=D=L=R=k.$$



    The total number of edges is



    $$U+D+L+R=4k,$$



    and therefore a multiple of $4$.



    Constructing the polygons



    This is now looking like a combinatorics problem. For a given integer $k$, we must generate permutations of the four edge directions such that:




    • each direction occurs $k$ times.

    • vertical and horizontal directions alternate.

    • no section of the path (considering the whole path as a loop) may contain the same number of up, down, left and right edges.


    The last of of these is to prevent the path from returning to a previously visited point before it's complete.



    I think these requirements guarantee that every permutation generates a valid polygon, and that all valid polygons are generated (with a lot of repeats).



    Number of vertices of each type



    Consider the exterior angle at each vertex as we follow an anticlockwise path. This is $90°$ for a vertex where we turn left, and $-90°$ for one where we turn right. We need to have made one full rotation when we return to the starting point: that is, the sum of all the exterior angles must be $360°$.



    There must therefore be four more vertices where we turn left than ones where we turn right: or in terms of the internal angles, $4$ more $90°$ vertices than $270°$ ones.



    For the case where there are $4k$ vertices, let $n$ be the number of $270°$ vertices. Then there are $n+4$ $90°$ vertices, giving $2n+4$ vertices altogether. So we have



    $$2n+4=4k,$$



    from which



    $$n=2(k-1)$$



    Therefore




    A $4k$-sided polygon of this type has $2(k-1)$ $270°$ vertices and $2(k+1)$ $90°$ vertices.




    Impossibility of the 8-sided polygon



    Suppose one of these polygons has $8$ sides. From the above, it has six $90°$ vertices and two $270°$ vertices. How are these arranged as we travel round the polygon?



    First note that three vertices of the same type in succession—corresponding to three left or right turns—takes us round a small square. This is only OK if the small square is the entire polygon. So for $k>1$, no more than two vertices of the same type may occur in succession.



    So each of the two $270°$ vertices can be followed by at most two $90°$ ones. But this only allows the polygon to have four $90°$ vertices, and it needs to have six.



    Therefore




    The 8-sided polygon cannot exist.




    A similar argument shows that




    The only $12$-sided polygon is the cross shape.




    For this one we have $k=3$, giving $8$ vertices of one type and $4$ of the other. Denoting the two types as $L$ for a left turn ($90°$) and $R$ for a right turn ($270°$), the only possible sequence is $RLLRLLRLLRLL$, which generates the cross shape. Every $R$ has to be followed by $LL$, to avoid having three $L$'s in succession.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    Edit: I've added a proof that the $8$-sided polygon can't exist.





    Number of edges



    Not an actual formula for the number of edges, but a proof that:




    The number of edges is always a multiple of $4$.




    Travelling anticlockwise around the perimeter of the polygon, assign to each edge one of {up, down, left, right} according to the direction of travel along that edge.



    It's clear that vertical and horizontal edges must alternate, since two vertical/horizontal edges in succession either make a longer edge or place one edge on top of the other, neither of which is alllowed.



    Let $U, D, L, R$ be the number of edges with the directions up, down, left and right respectively.



    In order to return to our starting point both vertically and horizontally, we require $$U=D$$ and $$L=R.$$



    There are $U+D$ vertical edges and $L+R$ horizontal edges. But every horizontal edge is preceded by a vertical adge and vice versa, so $$U+D=L+R.$$



    Together, these requirements imply



    $$U=D=L=R=k.$$



    The total number of edges is



    $$U+D+L+R=4k,$$



    and therefore a multiple of $4$.



    Constructing the polygons



    This is now looking like a combinatorics problem. For a given integer $k$, we must generate permutations of the four edge directions such that:




    • each direction occurs $k$ times.

    • vertical and horizontal directions alternate.

    • no section of the path (considering the whole path as a loop) may contain the same number of up, down, left and right edges.


    The last of of these is to prevent the path from returning to a previously visited point before it's complete.



    I think these requirements guarantee that every permutation generates a valid polygon, and that all valid polygons are generated (with a lot of repeats).



    Number of vertices of each type



    Consider the exterior angle at each vertex as we follow an anticlockwise path. This is $90°$ for a vertex where we turn left, and $-90°$ for one where we turn right. We need to have made one full rotation when we return to the starting point: that is, the sum of all the exterior angles must be $360°$.



    There must therefore be four more vertices where we turn left than ones where we turn right: or in terms of the internal angles, $4$ more $90°$ vertices than $270°$ ones.



    For the case where there are $4k$ vertices, let $n$ be the number of $270°$ vertices. Then there are $n+4$ $90°$ vertices, giving $2n+4$ vertices altogether. So we have



    $$2n+4=4k,$$



    from which



    $$n=2(k-1)$$



    Therefore




    A $4k$-sided polygon of this type has $2(k-1)$ $270°$ vertices and $2(k+1)$ $90°$ vertices.




    Impossibility of the 8-sided polygon



    Suppose one of these polygons has $8$ sides. From the above, it has six $90°$ vertices and two $270°$ vertices. How are these arranged as we travel round the polygon?



    First note that three vertices of the same type in succession—corresponding to three left or right turns—takes us round a small square. This is only OK if the small square is the entire polygon. So for $k>1$, no more than two vertices of the same type may occur in succession.



    So each of the two $270°$ vertices can be followed by at most two $90°$ ones. But this only allows the polygon to have four $90°$ vertices, and it needs to have six.



    Therefore




    The 8-sided polygon cannot exist.




    A similar argument shows that




    The only $12$-sided polygon is the cross shape.




    For this one we have $k=3$, giving $8$ vertices of one type and $4$ of the other. Denoting the two types as $L$ for a left turn ($90°$) and $R$ for a right turn ($270°$), the only possible sequence is $RLLRLLRLLRLL$, which generates the cross shape. Every $R$ has to be followed by $LL$, to avoid having three $L$'s in succession.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Jan 15 at 1:23

























    answered Jan 12 at 23:04









    timtfjtimtfj

    2,468420




    2,468420












    • $begingroup$
      Together with the simple square and the diagonal arrangement of overlapping crosses in Frpzzd's answer, this is enough to show that polygons of $4k$ sides are possible for $k=1$ and for all $kgeq 3$. But it's bedtime and I'm having trouble posting, so I'll leave that for now.
      $endgroup$
      – timtfj
      Jan 15 at 1:37










    • $begingroup$
      Only for those values of $k$, that is. Every positive $k$ except $2$.
      $endgroup$
      – timtfj
      Jan 15 at 1:49




















    • $begingroup$
      Together with the simple square and the diagonal arrangement of overlapping crosses in Frpzzd's answer, this is enough to show that polygons of $4k$ sides are possible for $k=1$ and for all $kgeq 3$. But it's bedtime and I'm having trouble posting, so I'll leave that for now.
      $endgroup$
      – timtfj
      Jan 15 at 1:37










    • $begingroup$
      Only for those values of $k$, that is. Every positive $k$ except $2$.
      $endgroup$
      – timtfj
      Jan 15 at 1:49


















    $begingroup$
    Together with the simple square and the diagonal arrangement of overlapping crosses in Frpzzd's answer, this is enough to show that polygons of $4k$ sides are possible for $k=1$ and for all $kgeq 3$. But it's bedtime and I'm having trouble posting, so I'll leave that for now.
    $endgroup$
    – timtfj
    Jan 15 at 1:37




    $begingroup$
    Together with the simple square and the diagonal arrangement of overlapping crosses in Frpzzd's answer, this is enough to show that polygons of $4k$ sides are possible for $k=1$ and for all $kgeq 3$. But it's bedtime and I'm having trouble posting, so I'll leave that for now.
    $endgroup$
    – timtfj
    Jan 15 at 1:37












    $begingroup$
    Only for those values of $k$, that is. Every positive $k$ except $2$.
    $endgroup$
    – timtfj
    Jan 15 at 1:49






    $begingroup$
    Only for those values of $k$, that is. Every positive $k$ except $2$.
    $endgroup$
    – timtfj
    Jan 15 at 1:49













    1












    $begingroup$

    Here are a few interesting infinite families of polygons satisfying your requirements. One way to generalize your "plus-sign" example is to attach many of these together to form a long chain of them, like this:



    enter image description here



    The $n$th polygon in this sequence of polygons has $8n+4$ sides. You can also attach the plus-signs to each other like this:



    enter image description here



    The $n$th polygon in this sequence will have $4n+8$ sides, if you choose the ordinary "plus-sign" polygon as the first member of the sequence. You can also combine polygons from either of these families to create monstrosities like this:



    enter image description here



    This reasoning will lead to @HenningMakholm's conclusion that any shape created can be made by attaching these "plus-sign" polygons to each other.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$









    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Is there any way to generalize both of these families (in terms of a number of sides formula)? Oscar Lanzi had 4n+4. Is that the most general that these polyominos can get to?
      $endgroup$
      – mathboy1296
      Jan 12 at 18:57










    • $begingroup$
      Actually Imistyped. I get only 8n+4. Will edit my answer.
      $endgroup$
      – Oscar Lanzi
      Jan 14 at 0:57
















    1












    $begingroup$

    Here are a few interesting infinite families of polygons satisfying your requirements. One way to generalize your "plus-sign" example is to attach many of these together to form a long chain of them, like this:



    enter image description here



    The $n$th polygon in this sequence of polygons has $8n+4$ sides. You can also attach the plus-signs to each other like this:



    enter image description here



    The $n$th polygon in this sequence will have $4n+8$ sides, if you choose the ordinary "plus-sign" polygon as the first member of the sequence. You can also combine polygons from either of these families to create monstrosities like this:



    enter image description here



    This reasoning will lead to @HenningMakholm's conclusion that any shape created can be made by attaching these "plus-sign" polygons to each other.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$









    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Is there any way to generalize both of these families (in terms of a number of sides formula)? Oscar Lanzi had 4n+4. Is that the most general that these polyominos can get to?
      $endgroup$
      – mathboy1296
      Jan 12 at 18:57










    • $begingroup$
      Actually Imistyped. I get only 8n+4. Will edit my answer.
      $endgroup$
      – Oscar Lanzi
      Jan 14 at 0:57














    1












    1








    1





    $begingroup$

    Here are a few interesting infinite families of polygons satisfying your requirements. One way to generalize your "plus-sign" example is to attach many of these together to form a long chain of them, like this:



    enter image description here



    The $n$th polygon in this sequence of polygons has $8n+4$ sides. You can also attach the plus-signs to each other like this:



    enter image description here



    The $n$th polygon in this sequence will have $4n+8$ sides, if you choose the ordinary "plus-sign" polygon as the first member of the sequence. You can also combine polygons from either of these families to create monstrosities like this:



    enter image description here



    This reasoning will lead to @HenningMakholm's conclusion that any shape created can be made by attaching these "plus-sign" polygons to each other.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    Here are a few interesting infinite families of polygons satisfying your requirements. One way to generalize your "plus-sign" example is to attach many of these together to form a long chain of them, like this:



    enter image description here



    The $n$th polygon in this sequence of polygons has $8n+4$ sides. You can also attach the plus-signs to each other like this:



    enter image description here



    The $n$th polygon in this sequence will have $4n+8$ sides, if you choose the ordinary "plus-sign" polygon as the first member of the sequence. You can also combine polygons from either of these families to create monstrosities like this:



    enter image description here



    This reasoning will lead to @HenningMakholm's conclusion that any shape created can be made by attaching these "plus-sign" polygons to each other.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered Jan 12 at 17:56









    FrpzzdFrpzzd

    23k841110




    23k841110








    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Is there any way to generalize both of these families (in terms of a number of sides formula)? Oscar Lanzi had 4n+4. Is that the most general that these polyominos can get to?
      $endgroup$
      – mathboy1296
      Jan 12 at 18:57










    • $begingroup$
      Actually Imistyped. I get only 8n+4. Will edit my answer.
      $endgroup$
      – Oscar Lanzi
      Jan 14 at 0:57














    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Is there any way to generalize both of these families (in terms of a number of sides formula)? Oscar Lanzi had 4n+4. Is that the most general that these polyominos can get to?
      $endgroup$
      – mathboy1296
      Jan 12 at 18:57










    • $begingroup$
      Actually Imistyped. I get only 8n+4. Will edit my answer.
      $endgroup$
      – Oscar Lanzi
      Jan 14 at 0:57








    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    Is there any way to generalize both of these families (in terms of a number of sides formula)? Oscar Lanzi had 4n+4. Is that the most general that these polyominos can get to?
    $endgroup$
    – mathboy1296
    Jan 12 at 18:57




    $begingroup$
    Is there any way to generalize both of these families (in terms of a number of sides formula)? Oscar Lanzi had 4n+4. Is that the most general that these polyominos can get to?
    $endgroup$
    – mathboy1296
    Jan 12 at 18:57












    $begingroup$
    Actually Imistyped. I get only 8n+4. Will edit my answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Oscar Lanzi
    Jan 14 at 0:57




    $begingroup$
    Actually Imistyped. I get only 8n+4. Will edit my answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Oscar Lanzi
    Jan 14 at 0:57











    0












    $begingroup$

    I think the polygons you can make in this way are exactly:




    • A square


    • Any connected shape without holes that can be made by selecting some of the white squares on an infinite checkerboard and placing a "plus sign" centered on each selected square. (The arms of neighboring plus signs will overlap).







    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      I think the polygons you can make in this way are exactly:




      • A square


      • Any connected shape without holes that can be made by selecting some of the white squares on an infinite checkerboard and placing a "plus sign" centered on each selected square. (The arms of neighboring plus signs will overlap).







      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        I think the polygons you can make in this way are exactly:




        • A square


        • Any connected shape without holes that can be made by selecting some of the white squares on an infinite checkerboard and placing a "plus sign" centered on each selected square. (The arms of neighboring plus signs will overlap).







        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        I think the polygons you can make in this way are exactly:




        • A square


        • Any connected shape without holes that can be made by selecting some of the white squares on an infinite checkerboard and placing a "plus sign" centered on each selected square. (The arms of neighboring plus signs will overlap).








        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Jan 12 at 17:52









        Henning MakholmHenning Makholm

        242k17308550




        242k17308550























            0












            $begingroup$

            There are infinitely many of them. You can generate an infinite subset by building on a single square.



            Start with the one square. Attach four more, congruent squares one on each side, getting your "plus sign". Note that this figure has four 270° corners located at the corners of the first square. Place another square play each of these concavoties, filling in the space around that point, then add four more squares on the outernost edges of the +sign you had. You now have a figure containing 20 sides and vertices, with eight of the vertices concave. Note that these concave vertices had been the 90° corners of the previous + sign.



            You can keep going. At each stage put a square in each concave corner and then squares on the outer edges of the latest figure to get the next figure. After $n$ iterations there are $4(2n+1)$ sides, the same number of vertices, and $4n$ of these vertices having 270° angles.



            As mentioned, this is only a subset of the possibilities. Others will likely post more.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              I don't think you can get all instances of $4(n+1)$: it is not possible to have $8$ sides. All multiples of $4$ from $12$ upwards can be realized by diagonal sequences of pluses, though.
              $endgroup$
              – Henning Makholm
              Jan 14 at 0:32
















            0












            $begingroup$

            There are infinitely many of them. You can generate an infinite subset by building on a single square.



            Start with the one square. Attach four more, congruent squares one on each side, getting your "plus sign". Note that this figure has four 270° corners located at the corners of the first square. Place another square play each of these concavoties, filling in the space around that point, then add four more squares on the outernost edges of the +sign you had. You now have a figure containing 20 sides and vertices, with eight of the vertices concave. Note that these concave vertices had been the 90° corners of the previous + sign.



            You can keep going. At each stage put a square in each concave corner and then squares on the outer edges of the latest figure to get the next figure. After $n$ iterations there are $4(2n+1)$ sides, the same number of vertices, and $4n$ of these vertices having 270° angles.



            As mentioned, this is only a subset of the possibilities. Others will likely post more.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              I don't think you can get all instances of $4(n+1)$: it is not possible to have $8$ sides. All multiples of $4$ from $12$ upwards can be realized by diagonal sequences of pluses, though.
              $endgroup$
              – Henning Makholm
              Jan 14 at 0:32














            0












            0








            0





            $begingroup$

            There are infinitely many of them. You can generate an infinite subset by building on a single square.



            Start with the one square. Attach four more, congruent squares one on each side, getting your "plus sign". Note that this figure has four 270° corners located at the corners of the first square. Place another square play each of these concavoties, filling in the space around that point, then add four more squares on the outernost edges of the +sign you had. You now have a figure containing 20 sides and vertices, with eight of the vertices concave. Note that these concave vertices had been the 90° corners of the previous + sign.



            You can keep going. At each stage put a square in each concave corner and then squares on the outer edges of the latest figure to get the next figure. After $n$ iterations there are $4(2n+1)$ sides, the same number of vertices, and $4n$ of these vertices having 270° angles.



            As mentioned, this is only a subset of the possibilities. Others will likely post more.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            There are infinitely many of them. You can generate an infinite subset by building on a single square.



            Start with the one square. Attach four more, congruent squares one on each side, getting your "plus sign". Note that this figure has four 270° corners located at the corners of the first square. Place another square play each of these concavoties, filling in the space around that point, then add four more squares on the outernost edges of the +sign you had. You now have a figure containing 20 sides and vertices, with eight of the vertices concave. Note that these concave vertices had been the 90° corners of the previous + sign.



            You can keep going. At each stage put a square in each concave corner and then squares on the outer edges of the latest figure to get the next figure. After $n$ iterations there are $4(2n+1)$ sides, the same number of vertices, and $4n$ of these vertices having 270° angles.



            As mentioned, this is only a subset of the possibilities. Others will likely post more.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Jan 14 at 0:57

























            answered Jan 12 at 17:46









            Oscar LanziOscar Lanzi

            13.2k12136




            13.2k12136












            • $begingroup$
              I don't think you can get all instances of $4(n+1)$: it is not possible to have $8$ sides. All multiples of $4$ from $12$ upwards can be realized by diagonal sequences of pluses, though.
              $endgroup$
              – Henning Makholm
              Jan 14 at 0:32


















            • $begingroup$
              I don't think you can get all instances of $4(n+1)$: it is not possible to have $8$ sides. All multiples of $4$ from $12$ upwards can be realized by diagonal sequences of pluses, though.
              $endgroup$
              – Henning Makholm
              Jan 14 at 0:32
















            $begingroup$
            I don't think you can get all instances of $4(n+1)$: it is not possible to have $8$ sides. All multiples of $4$ from $12$ upwards can be realized by diagonal sequences of pluses, though.
            $endgroup$
            – Henning Makholm
            Jan 14 at 0:32




            $begingroup$
            I don't think you can get all instances of $4(n+1)$: it is not possible to have $8$ sides. All multiples of $4$ from $12$ upwards can be realized by diagonal sequences of pluses, though.
            $endgroup$
            – Henning Makholm
            Jan 14 at 0:32


















            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3071149%2fgenerating-or-counting-the-sides-of-square-like-polygons-with-all-congruent%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Human spaceflight

            Can not write log (Is /dev/pts mounted?) - openpty in Ubuntu-on-Windows?

            張江高科駅