Timeline for Eberhard-type theorems for Fisk triangulations?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 15, 2017 at 4:38 | comment | added | Ivan Izmestiev | Yes, you are right. I have adjusted the terminology now. And right, I am proving this implication (although one should be a bit careful and watch for double edges in this situation as well). | |
| Oct 15, 2017 at 4:36 | history | edited | Ivan Izmestiev | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 6 characters in body
|
| Oct 15, 2017 at 4:33 | comment | added | domotorp | What is an "odd Fisk"? Is it the triangulation in question? (I would call it 6-regular Fisk, as I see nothing odd about it, so maybe you mean something else.) And just to summarize: You've proved that if such a triangulation exists for the torus, then it exists for every orientable surface, right? | |
| Oct 14, 2017 at 12:05 | comment | added | Ivan Izmestiev | I have edited the last paragraph, hopefully it is clearer now. On the other hand, for the torus it seems to me now that the "(3,9) Fisk" triangulation will necessarily have a multiple edge. | |
| Oct 14, 2017 at 12:02 | history | edited | Ivan Izmestiev | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Some clarifications. One more thought added.
|
| Oct 14, 2017 at 11:48 | comment | added | domotorp | Thanks for the answer. I knew most of these results, as I'm familiar with some of your work. But I didn't really get your last para. Which statement would follow from which? What I would be really interested in is a Fisk triangulation without short non-contractible cycles. | |
| Oct 14, 2017 at 10:48 | history | edited | Ivan Izmestiev | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added another idea.
|
| Oct 14, 2017 at 8:44 | history | answered | Ivan Izmestiev | CC BY-SA 3.0 |