What is the smallest number of $45^\circ-60^\circ-75^\circ$ triangles that a square can be divided into?

7.6k Views Asked by At

What is the smallest number of $45^\circ-60^\circ-75^\circ$ triangles that a square can be divided into?

The image below is a flawed example, from http://www.mathpuzzle.com/flawed456075.gif

math puzzle 45-60-75 triangles

Laczkovich gave a solution with many hundreds of triangles, but this was just an demonstration of existence, and not a minimal solution. ( Laczkovich, M. "Tilings of Polygons with Similar Triangles." Combinatorica 10, 281-306, 1990. )

I've offered a prize for this problem: In US dollars, (\$200-number of triangles).

NEW: The prize is won, with a 50 triangle solution by Lew Baxter.

4

There are 4 best solutions below

7
On BEST ANSWER

enter image description here

Here's my solution with 32 triangles.

How

enter image description here

First, I find all polygons that can be created by attaching the 45-60-75 triangle to a copy of itself, such that an edge coincides. There are twelve unique polygons comprised of two triangles like this. (The above image shows one example).

Next, I find all polygons that can be created by attaching a 1-triangle polygon to a 2-triangle polygon. Now I have 108 3-triangle polygons.

I repeat this process. For efficiency, I only keep track of the polygon outlines, and not how the polygons were created. Also, I avoid creating any polygons with more than 5 sides, and discard any polygons with coordinates with overly complicated fractions as coordinates.

Here are how many unique polygons I retain at each stage:

# triangles # polygons
2 12
3 108
4 560
5 2597
6 9594
7 34319
8 113015
9 338944
10 969019
11 2578767
12 6540652

I can search further, but searching all 14-triangle polygons takes many hours.

A shortcut

enter image description here

When the 5-sided pink polygon is generated, I also calculate what 4-sided polygon is needed to complete a big triangle. This allows solutions to be found much "earlier".

Other Details

  • All triangle coordinates are in the field Q*sqrt(3) (of the form a+b*sqrt(3), for fractional numbers a and b).

  • Side lengths are also in the same field, but with an extra factor of *sqrt(2) for lines angled at 15 degrees, 45 degrees, 75 degrees, etc (odd multiples of 15 degrees).

enter image description here

  • For finding all polygons comprised of say, 8 triangles, considering 5+3=8 gives more solutions than just adding 1 polygon. (The above image shows this idea.)

  • It's useful to canonicalize a polygon, and refer to it by a hash value

  • I store a polygon as a series of "rays" (edges), where each ray has one of 12 directions (0 degrees, 15 degree, ..., 165 degrees), and the ray "length" can be negative. This allows polygons to be stored in a "bucket" based the directions of its rays. So, only the polygon lengths need to be stored. Also, the last two lengths don't actually need to be stored, they can be calculated. (This may have been overkill, but it allowed for various optimizations).

  • Once a big 90-45-45 triangle is created, it's a pain to reconstruct how I got it. I end up running my program multiple times to re-trace the steps.

34-triangle solutions

enter image description here

Possible Improvements

I'm not too optimistic about finding a better decomposition of a 90-45-45 triangle. But maybe the square could be decomposed into two 6-triangle polygons like this.

Observations

All the solutions here have similarities. The perimeter has exactly 4 more 45-degree angles than 75-degree angles. So the opposite must be true on the interior. This can only be accomplished with a 75-75-75-75-60-degree junction.

enter image description here

Also, I noticed that if you "cut" the tiling (from the perimeter into the 75-75-75-75-60 junction) and then "warp" the tiling, you get a very regular grid.

Coordinates

1968-72√₃,396+12√₃
2340-324√₃,1152-360√₃
2220-196√₃,528+16√₃
1584+48√₃,396+12√₃
2352-192√₃,396+12√₃
2340-324√₃,0
1188+36√₃,0
2346-258√₃,198+6√₃
2544-252√₃,0
2550-186√₃,198+6√₃
2565-21√₃,693+21√₃
612+216√₃,612+216√₃
0,0
3258,0
3258,2016-630√₃
2340-324√₃,2340-324√₃
3258,3258
{{0,1,2},{3,1,0},{4,0,2},{5,3,4},{6,5,3},{7,8,9},{8,7,5},{9,4,7},{10,9,2},{11,1,6},{12,6,11},{13,10,8},{13,14,10},{15,11,1},{14,1,15},{16,15,14}}
4
On

I have no answer to the question, but here's a picture resulting from some initial attempts to understand the constraints that exist on any solution.

$\qquad$ 45-60-75

This image was generated by considering what seemed to be the simplest possible configuration that might produce a tiling of a rectangle. Starting with the two “split pentagons” in the centre, the rest of the configuration is produced by triangulation. In this image, all the additional triangles are “forced”, and the configuration can be extended no further without violating the contraints of triangulation. If I had time, I'd move on to investigating the use of “split hexagons”.

The forcing criterion is that triangulation requires every vertex to be surrounded either (a) by six $60^\circ$ angles, three triangles being oriented one way and three the other, or else (b) by two $45^\circ$ angles, two $60^\circ$ angles and two $75^\circ$ angles, the triangles in each pair being of opposite orientations.

2
On

I improved on Laczkovich's solution by using a different orientation of the 4 small central triangles, by choosing better parameters (x, y) and using fewer triangles for a total of 64 triangles. The original Laczkovich solution uses about 7 trillion triangles.

tiling with 64 triangles

Here's one with 50 triangles:

enter image description here

0
On

The following was posted by Ed Pegg as a suggested edit to Lew Baxter's answer, but was rejected for being too substantial a change. I thought it was useful information, so I reproduce it below. If you no longer want it to be posted here, Ed, leave a comment and I'll delete it.


Exact points for the triangles are as follows, with $b=\sqrt3$:

$$\{\{0,0\}, \{261+93b,0\}, \{522+186b,0\}, \{2709-489b,0\}, \{3492-210b,0\}, \{3890-140b,0\}, \{4288-70b,0\}, \{4686,0\}, \{252+9b,252+9b\}, \{513+102b,252+9b\}, \{774+195b,252+9b\}, \{3000-116b,492-94b\}, \{3398-46b,492-94b\}, \{3597-11b,492-94b\}, \{3796+24b,492-94b\}, \{4194+94b,492-94b\}, \{2262+25b,1230-235b\}, \{2859+130b,1230-235b\}, \{3456+235b,1230-235b\}, \{756+27b,756+27b\}, \{2214-423b,756+27b\}, \{1278+213b,756+27b\}, \{2736-237b,756+27b\}, \{1260+45b,1260+45b\}, \{1746-105b,1260+45b\}, \{2232-255b,1260+45b\}, \{1428+51b,1428+51b\}, \{1278+213b,2214-423b\}, \{1278+213b,1278+213b\}, \{1980+517b,2706-517b\}, \{0,1491+639b\}, \{1278+213b,3408-213b\}, \{0,4686\}\}$$

The triangles use points $$\{\{1,2,9\},\{2,9,10\},\{2,3,10\},\{3,10,11\},\{3,4,22\},\{4,22,23\},\{4,23,5\},\{5,12,13\},\{5,6,13\},\{6,13,15\},\{6,7,15\},\{7,15,16\},\{7,8,16\},\{9,11,20\},\{11,20,22\},\{12,17,18\},\{12,14,18\},\{14,18,19\},\{14,16,19\},\{20,21,24\},\{21,24,26\},\{21,26,23\},\{24,25,27\},\{25,27,28\},\{25,26,28\},\{27,28,29\},\{1,29,31\},\{29,31,32\},\{31,32,33\},\{17,19,30\},\{17,30,28\},\{28,30,32\}\}$$

Leading to the solution:

Full square solution