Forcing nonperiodicity with a single tile (Q2429455)

From MaRDI portal
scientific article
Language Label Description Also known as
English
Forcing nonperiodicity with a single tile
scientific article

    Statements

    Forcing nonperiodicity with a single tile (English)
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    27 April 2012
    0 references
    A finite set of (possibly marked) prototiles in \(d\)-space, counted up to translations or up to similarity, is called \textit{aperiodic}, when the prototiles (together with some local rules) admit a (marked) tiling of \(d\)-space, but none with any non-trivial period. Of particular interest are aperiodic prototile sets of minimal cardinality. The well-known Penrose rhombuses provide an example for the plane with 2 prototiles (up to similarity), while the SCD biprism in \(3\)-space is an example of a monotile, provided that only one chirality is admitted (hence restricting to orientation-preserving similarities); see [\textit{L. Danzer}, ``A family of 3D-spacefillers not permitting any periodic or quasiperiodic tiling'', in: Aperiodic '94. Singapore: World Scientific. 11--17 (1995)] or [\textit{M. Baake} and \textit{D. Frettlöh}, J. Math. Phys. 46, No. 3, 033510, 10 p. (2005; Zbl 1067.82059)]. Despite its non-periodicity, the SCD tiling still shows an infinite symmetry group, generated by a glide rotation. It is thus sometimes said to be aperiodic, but not strongly aperiodic. An example of a monotile for the plane was recently discovered by Joan Taylor (see \url{http://www.math.uni-bielefeld.de/sfb701/preprints/view/420} for a preliminary account) and then analysed in detail, with various extensions, by \textit{J. E. S. Socolar} and \textit{J. M. Taylor} [J. Comb. Theory, Ser. A 118, No. 8, 2207--2231 (2011; Zbl 1232.05052)]. Unlike the SCD tile, the resulting marked hexagon together with nearest and next-to-nearest neighbour rules is a monotile (or `einstein') only if the reflected version is also admitted (and not counted separately). The present article is a popular account of the corresponding tilings and some of their properties. For the mathematical core of the matter, [Zbl 1232.05052] is the better source. It should be noted that an earlier account by \textit{R. Penrose} [NATO ASI Ser., Ser. C, Math. Phys. Sci. 489, 467--497 (1997; Zbl 0884.52020)], on a closely related tiling, is described. A derived monotile was published by Penrose as a puzzle with solution in the Twistor Newsletter [TN 41, 37 (1996); TN 42, 25--26 (1997); TN 43, 34 (1998); available online at: \url{http://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/lmason/Tn/ }] which is reprinted in his Collected Works. Though this addition to [Zbl 0884.52020] only contains a brief sketch of a proof, it is a subtly different (though related) monotile with hexagonal shape that predates the Socolar-Taylor example (unfortunately, this is not mentioned in the article). The two examples (the minimal part of the ST tiling and the Penrose \(1+\epsilon + \epsilon^{2}\) tiling from [Zbl 0884.52020]) are related in that both can be viewed as almost everywhere 1:1 covers of the well-known aperiodic half-hex inflation tiling. Both add (subtly different) non-local information in order to turn the half-hex into an inflation species with aperiodic perfect local rules. The ST rules can be relaxed to aperiodic local rules that define a slightly larger, non-minimal tiling space, somewhat similar to the situation of the classic Robinson tiling space (compare the recent preprint by \textit{F. Gaehler, A. Julien} and \textit{J. Savignien} [``Combinatorics and topology of the Robinson tiling'', \url{arXiv:1203.1387}]). Adding the third dimension, the local rules of the ST tiling can geometrically be encoded in a single 3D prototile that is connected (the authors call it simply connected, though the illustrations show a version that is mere connected). This 3D prototile admits tilings of \(3\)-space that are periodic in one direction but aperiodic perpendicular to it. The authors present some thoughts towards alternative definitions of aperiodicity. One appears deliberately designed to rule out the SCD tiling but to include the 3D version of their own tiling (even though the latter is compatible with rank-1 periodicity in the usual sense). These attempts are rather special and somewhat unnatural, if not misleading, and ignore established and proven approaches from mathematics which start from the tiling space that is defined by the prototile set.
    0 references
    0 references

    Identifiers

    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references