Skip to main content
8 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Aug 25, 2015 at 11:49 history edited Per Alexandersson CC BY-SA 3.0
added 71 characters in body
Aug 25, 2015 at 11:47 comment added Per Alexandersson @YoavKallus: Ah, you are right!
Aug 25, 2015 at 5:29 comment added Yoav Kallus Jacky's tiling is not isohedral. Some pentagons have the long edge (the one between the two parallel edges) meeting a long edge, while some pentagons have the long edge meeting two short edges. Therefore, those two different pentagons cannot be equivalent.
Aug 25, 2015 at 4:06 comment added Noam D. Elkies Again, Wikipedia does not answer quite the same question. The five Reinhardt classes of pentagons all have 1-isohedral tilings. Some of them may also have other 1-isohedral tilings. So the fact that Jacky's tiling is 1-isohedral doesn't force it to be either new or one of the five types of tilings shown, even though the pentagon does fall in at least one of Reinhardt's classes.
Aug 25, 2015 at 3:34 comment added Per Alexandersson Added: According to this source, jaapsch.net/tilings/Tilings.pdf all 1-isohedral tilings are fully understood....
Aug 25, 2015 at 3:32 comment added Per Alexandersson Yeah, it seems so simple, that it is most likely in the original family of 5, since it has the 1-isohedral property, and these are probably easy to exhaust/verify is complete by computer search (but I might be completely wrong on this, maybe suitable as a follow-up question?).
Aug 25, 2015 at 3:18 comment added Jacky Thanks. I guess by p4 you were referring to type 4? If you take a look at the 2nd generalization in my answer to my own question, you would find out that only 1 right angle is needed, while type 4 pentagon needs 2 right angle. As answered by Noam, it actually belongs to type 1 I guess, since type 1 pentagons summarizes all pentagons with parallel sides, which include both of my generalizations.
Aug 25, 2015 at 3:10 history answered Per Alexandersson CC BY-SA 3.0