Is "Napkin conjecture" open ? (ORIGAMI) - MathOverflow most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net2013-06-19T04:29:42Zhttp://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/46866http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdfhttp://mathoverflow.net/questions/46866/is-napkin-conjecture-open-origamiIs "Napkin conjecture" open ? (ORIGAMI)Jérôme JEAN-CHARLES2010-11-21T21:40:44Z2011-12-11T00:25:54Z
<p>If false the following conjecture would be a nice counter intuitive fact. </p>
<p>Given a square sheet of perimeter $P$ when folding it along Origami moves you end up with some polygonal flat figure with perimeter $P^'$ :<br>
<em>Napkin conjecture</em> : You always have $P^' \leq P$.</p>
<p>In other words you cannot increase the perimeter using any finite sequence of origami folds. </p>
<p><strong>Q1</strong>: Intuition tells us it is true ( how on hell can it increase?). Yet I think I read somewhere that there was some weird folding (called "mountain urchin"??) that strictly increases the perimeter. Is this true?<br>
<em>Note1</em> : I am not even sure that the initial sheet's squareness is required. </p>
<p>I cannot find any reference on the net, maybe the name has changed, I heard about this 20 years ago. </p>
<p>The second question is about generalizing the conjecture.</p>
<p><strong>Q2</strong>: With the idea of generalizing the conjecture to continuous folds or bends ( using some average shadow as a perimeter) I stumble on how you can mathematically define bending a sheet, alternatively : how do you say "a sheet is untearable" in maths?<br>
<strong>Note2</strong>: It might also be a matter of physics about how much we idealize bending mathematically. </p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/46866/is-napkin-conjecture-open-origami/46867#46867Answer by Andrey Rekalo for Is "Napkin conjecture" open ? (ORIGAMI)Andrey Rekalo2010-11-21T21:56:27Z2010-11-22T01:52:36Z<p>There is a general version of this question which is known as <em>"the rumpled dollar problem"</em>. It was posed by V.I. Arnold at his seminar in 1956. It appears as the very first problem in <a href="http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LqvLnu8c3ToC&printsec=frontcover&dq=arnold%2527s+problems&source=bl&ots=l0ULwBNvsc&sig=mLNHb1upSiddEtfrHRjbjvJPfzE&hl=en&ei=6ZPpTIvqLcuaOozXvZEK&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow"><em>"Arnold's Problems"</em></a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Is it possible to increase the perimeter of
a rectangle by a sequence of foldings and unfoldings? </p>
</blockquote>
<p>According to the same source (p. 182), </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Alexei Tarasov has shown that a rectangle admits a realizable folding with arbitrarily large perimeter. A realizable folding means that it could be realized in such a way as if the rectangle were made of infinitely thin but absolutely nontensile paper. Thus, a folding is a map $f:B\to\mathbb R^2$ which is isometric on every polygon of some subdivision of the rectangle $B$. Moreover, the folding $f$ is realizable as a piecewise isometric homotopy which, in turn, can be approximated by some isotopy of space (which corresponds to the impossibility of self-intersection of a paper sheet during the folding process). </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Have a look at</p>
<ul>
<li><p>A. Tarasov, <em>Solution of Arnold’s “folded rouble” problem.</em> (in Russian) Chebyshevskii Sb. 5 (2004), 174–187.</p></li>
<li><p>I. Yashenko, <em>Make your dollar bigger now!!!</em> Math. Intelligencer 20 (1998), no. 2, 38–40.</p></li>
</ul>
<hr>
<p>A history of the problem is also briefly discussed in Tabachnikov's <a href="http://www.math.psu.edu/tabachni/prints/Arnoldpr.pdf" rel="nofollow">review</a> of "Arnold's Problems":</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It is interesting that the problem was solved by origami practitioners way before it was posed (at least, in 1797, in the Japanese origami book “Senbazuru Orikata”).</p>
</blockquote>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/46866/is-napkin-conjecture-open-origami/46941#46941Answer by Joseph O'Rourke for Is "Napkin conjecture" open ? (ORIGAMI)Joseph O'Rourke2010-11-22T12:48:03Z2011-12-11T00:25:54Z<p>Permit me to supplement Andrey's definitive answer.</p>
<p>First, as Gerry Myerson says, this problem is discussed in Robert Lang's
<em><a href="http://173-14-177-170-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net/product.asp?ProdCode=1942" rel="nofollow">Origami Design Secrets</a></em>: pp.315-318, under the title "The Margulis Napkin Problem."
He credits the problem to Gregori Margulis.</p>
<p>Second, the problem is discussed in Igok Pak's book
<em><a href="http://www.math.ucla.edu/~pak/book.htm" rel="nofollow">Lectures on Discrete and Polyhedral Geometry</a></em>, p.354, which is available online.
You can pretty much guess the proof from the following instructive figure of Igor's:</p>
<p><br /> <img src="http://people.csail.mit.edu/~orourke/MathOverflow/NapkinFolding.jpg" alt="Napkin"><br /></p>
<p>Third, there is another surprising result that is intellectually analogous to
increasing the perimeter by folding: The volume enclosed by any convex polyhedron
can be increased by bending the surface (retaining intrinsic isometry) to render it nonconvex!
See Chapter 39 of Igor's book, p.339ff.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/46866/is-napkin-conjecture-open-origami/61102#61102Answer by Anton Petrunin for Is "Napkin conjecture" open ? (ORIGAMI)Anton Petrunin2011-04-08T23:10:05Z2011-10-24T22:44:56Z<p>In addition to the answers above, here are some remarks from <a href="http://front.math.ucdavis.edu/1004.0545" rel="nofollow">my paper</a>.
(Sorry for self-advertisement.)</p>
<p><strong>1.</strong> An other solution.
It is based on idea of Yashenko.
This way you can incresae the perimeter just a bit,
but it is done by repeating one fold (which is very simple but not "simple" in the sense below). </p>
<p><img src="http://www.math.psu.edu/petrunin/papers/arnold/pics/yasch-hq.png" alt="alt text"></p>
<p><strong>2.</strong> It is still not known if you can increase the perimeter by a sequence of natural folds;
i.e., folds like this:
<img src="http://www.math.psu.edu/petrunin/papers/arnold/pics/otgib-hq.png" alt="alt text">
I just learned that this problem also appears in <a href="http://www.math.ucla.edu/~pak/book.htm" rel="nofollow">Pak's book</a>, Problem 40.16b;
it is marked by [$*$] which means that the problem is open.</p>