3
$\begingroup$

It is known that a square can be partitioned into three similar rectangles, all mutually non-congruent. I don't think it's possible with four. With what numbers of rectangles can this be achieved? And what if we relax the congruence condition?

So far, for $n$ similar rectangles in $t$ congruence classes, I have got

$$\begin{array}{cc|cccccc|} & & \text{no. of rectangles, n}\\ & & 1& 2& 3& 4& 5& 6\\ \hline \text{no. of congruence classes, t}& 1& yes& yes& yes& yes& yes& yes\\ & 2& -& no& yes& yes& yes& yes& \\ & 3& -& -& yes& yes& ?& ?& \\ & 4& -& -& -& (no?)& ?& ?& \\ & 5& -& -& -& -& ?& ?& \\ & 6& -& -& -& -& -& ?& \\ \hline \end{array}$$

$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

4
$\begingroup$

Here is the proof that square can be partitioned into $n$ non-congruent similar rectangles for any $n\ge 3$.

Consider this modification of the @florian-lehner's construction.

  • fix $A > 1$, we will choose it later
  • start with a $1\times 1$ square and $A \times A$ square lined up so that their upper borders are on the same height
  • alternate in attaching the square of appropriate size above and on the right of the drawing until you have $n-1$ squares in total

It should now look like this (here $n=5$):

From here on there is a slight difference between odd and even case.

For odd $n$ you get the rectangle of the size $(F_{n-2} A + F_{n-3}) \times (F_{n-1} A + F_{n-2})$ with a missing rectangular corner in the lower-left, of the size $(A-1) \times 1$. Here $F_n$ denote Fibonacci numbers.

Rescale horizontally by factor $\frac{F_{n-2} A + F_{n-3}}{F_{n-1} A + F_{n-2}}$ so that the big figure is a square, and now we need to find such $A$ that the missing corner rectangle is similar to all the present ones (but has different orientation).

This gives us $$ \frac{F_{n-2} A + F_{n-3}}{F_{n-1} A + F_{n-2}} : (A-1) = 1 : \frac{F_{n-2} A + F_{n-3}}{F_{n-1} A + F_{n-2}}$$

or the following cubic equation: $$f(A):=(A-1)(F_{n-1} A + F_{n-2})^2 - (F_{n-2} A + F_{n-3})^2 = 0$$ It is easy to see that $f(1)<0$ and $f(A)\rightarrow +\infty$ as $A$ grows. Thus by Intermediate value theorem the equation has a solution greater than $1$.

For even $n$ big rectangle is of the size $(F_{n-1} A + F_{n-2}) \times (F_{n-2} A + F_{n-3})$, but the argument is essentially the same.

Also here is Sage code that generates such partitions for any $n\ge 3$:

n=3

move = lambda P,v: map(lambda x: (x[0]+v[0],x[1]+v[1]), P) #transport by vector
times = lambda P,c: map(lambda x: (c*x[0],c*x[1]), P) #homothety

A=var('A')

if not n%2:
    A=solve((A-1)*(fibonacci(n-2)*A + fibonacci(n-3))^2 - (fibonacci(n-1)*A + fibonacci(n-2))^2 == 0, A, solution_dict=True)[2][A] #real solution of the equation in the even case
    W=(fibonacci(n-1)*A + fibonacci(n-2))/(fibonacci(n-2)*A + fibonacci(n-3)) #scaling factor in the even case
else:
    A=solve((A-1)*(fibonacci(n-1)*A + fibonacci(n-2))^2 - (fibonacci(n-2)*A + fibonacci(n-3))^2 == 0, A, solution_dict=True)[2][A] #real solution of the equation in the odd case
    W=(fibonacci(n-2)*A + fibonacci(n-3))/(fibonacci(n-1)*A + fibonacci(n-2)) #scaling factor in the odd case
H=A-1 #height of the "missing" corner

#now to just plot all the rectangles

horizontal=[(0,0),(W,0),(W,1),(0,1)]
vertical=[(0,0),(W,0),(W,H),(0,H)]

sumplot=polygon(vertical,fill=False)
v=A-1
c=1
for i in range(n//2):
    sumplot+=polygon(move(times(horizontal,c),(0,v)),fill=False)
    v=v+c
    c=v+c
v=1
c=A
for i in range((n-1)//2):
    sumplot+=polygon(move(times(horizontal,c),(W*v,0)),fill=False)
    v=v+c
    c=v+c

sumplot.show()
$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ That seems right. For $n=3$ your method gives the plastic number, known to be the only soln. But for $n=5$ we get the cubic $9A^3−A^2−12A−5=0$, which solves to A=1.37484...; and the side ratio $r$ for the component rectangles is then equal to the scale factor, so $r=\frac{3A+2}{2A+1}=1.63334...$. That's different from the soln I found by hand for $n=5$ (for which I get $r$ as the real zero of a quintic), although it is possible there is more than one soln. Please can you spell out what cubic and then what scaling factor you get for the even case. $\endgroup$
    – user159323
    Commented Sep 17, 2020 at 10:37
  • $\begingroup$ @ruffle, for even $n$ the scaling factor is $\frac{F_{n-1} A + F_{n-2}}{F_{n-2} A + F_{n-3}}$ and the resulting cubic is $(A-1)(F_{n-2} A + F_{n-3})^2 - (F_{n-1} A + F_{n-2})^2 = 0$. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 17, 2020 at 12:15
  • $\begingroup$ I think there might be a small error here somewhere. Plugging in $n=3$ gives $A=1.32472...$, the plastic number. This to 1 is the right answer for the side ratio of each rectangle, but applying the scale factor of $\frac{1A+0}{1A+1}=\frac{A}{A+1}=0.56984...$ then messes it up. $\endgroup$
    – user159323
    Commented Sep 17, 2020 at 13:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @ruffle No, actually, the required side ratio for the rectangle in case of n=3 is the square of plastic number, see e.g. mathoverflow.net/a/223135/134387 (from the answer to the question you referenced). $\frac{A}{A+1}$ happens to be equal to $\frac{1}{A^2}$ when $A$ is plastic number (this is precisely the cubic we solved). $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 17, 2020 at 14:51
  • $\begingroup$ @ruffle algorithm works, I wrote some simple code based on it, and it generates partitions of a square as it should. Edited it in. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 17, 2020 at 17:06
1
$\begingroup$

Here is a partial answer for when we relax the congruence relation: If the number $n$ of rectangles and the number $t$ of congruence classes satisfy $n \geq \frac{t (t+1)}2$, then the following construction gives a tiling (see the sketches below for $t=3$ and $n \in \{6,8\}$):

  • start with any rectangle (we'll rescale the drawing later, so the exact dimensions don't matter for now)
  • for $2 \leq j \leq t-1$, take $j$ copies of the rectangle scaled by $\frac 1j$ drawn above each other (so the total height is the same as the total height of the original rectangle) and to the right of what was drawn so far.
  • same as the second step, but with $j = n - \frac{t (t-1)}{2}$.

This construction doesn't give a tiling of a square, but we can always scale the coordinate system of our drawing so that it does. Since the orientation of all rectangles is the same, similarity is preserved under this scaling.

t=3,n=6

t=3,n=8


EDIT: A similar construction shows that as long as $n > t$, a tiling exists. Start with $n-t+1$ congruent rectangles drawn above each other. Then alternate in attaching a scaled (but not rotated) copy with the same height as the current drawing on the right, and attaching a scaled copy with the same width as the current drawing above (see below for $t=5$, $n=6$). Finally scale the axes so that the whole drawing fills a square.

t=5,n=6

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Very nice! So that leaves the diagonal along which $n=t$. I suspect in that case it is possible only for $n$ odd. $\endgroup$
    – user159323
    Commented Sep 11, 2020 at 2:38

You must log in to answer this question.