Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Suppose I have a collection of $n$ non-collinear points on a sphere, $\left\lbrace P_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n $. And I construct a mapping from this collection of points to the Delaunay Triangulation on the sphere, $\left\lbrace P_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n \overset{DT}{\mapsto} \left( \left\lbrace P_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n, \mathcal{F}_{\left\lbrace P_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n} , \mathcal{E}_{\left\lbrace P_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n}\right) $, where

  • $\left\lbrace P_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n$ is the set of vertices in the delaunay triangulation.
  • $\mathcal{F}_{\left\lbrace P_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n}$ is the set of faces (lets just say the faces are the interior regions only) on the sphere.
  • $\mathcal{E}_{\left\lbrace P_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n} $ is the set of edges. Edges are really arc segments on the sphere.

To illustrate the point, here is an example of such a Delaunay triangulation: http://hal.inria.fr/docs/00/44/19/38/PDF/RR-7004.pdf

Kulikowski's Theorem states, "For every positive integer, $n$, there exists a sphere which has exactly $n$ lattice points on its surface."

So lets call these $n$ lattice points, $\left\lbrace L_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n$ and corresponding Delaunay Triangulation mapping as such $\left\lbrace L_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n \overset{DT}{\mapsto} \left( \left\lbrace L_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n, \mathcal{F}_{\left\lbrace L_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n} , \mathcal{E}_{\left\lbrace L_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n}\right) $

So, I have some questions, and they are in descending ordered in which I desire an answer for:

  • Is there a graph isomorphism from $\left( \left\lbrace P_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n, \mathcal{F}_{\left\lbrace P_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n} , \mathcal{E}_{\left\lbrace P_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n}\right) $ to $\left( \left\lbrace L_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n, \mathcal{F}_{\left\lbrace L_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n} , \mathcal{E}_{\left\lbrace L_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n}\right) $? If so, does it preserve the (Face-Edge) relationships between the graphs?
  • If a graph isomorphism exists, is there a way to explicitly define the graph isomorphic mappings?
  • What is the basis for this lattice on the sphere for Kulikowski's Theorem? Is it any arbitrary basis?

I'm not really sure how to cite the image. I got it from this paper: http://hal.inria.fr/docs/00/44/19/38/PDF/RR-7004.pdf

share|improve this question
    
I'm wondering if this question is more catered to the mathoverflow. Yay? Nay? If not, then which community could best guide me to some answers? –  torrho Oct 2 '12 at 0:49
    
Okay, I thought about the lattice sphere for a little bit. 1. There are 3 types of faces on the sphere. Because I don't know the basis of the lattice, I assume $\left\lbrace l_1, l_2, l_3 \right\rbrace $ is a basis and that there can be three distinct angles that can be formed, the angle between $l_1$ and $l_2$, the angle between $l_2$ and $l_3$, and the angle between $l_1$ and $l_3$. We construct the equivalence classes of $\mathcal{F}_{\left\lbrace L_i\right\rbrace_{i=1}^n }$ determined by these distinct angles formed. Also, I can think of the lattice points as vertices of a polyhedron –  torrho Oct 2 '12 at 4:04
add comment

1 Answer 1

The answer to your first question is no: no Delaunay triangulation exists for the $n$ lattice points on the sphere from Kulikowski's Theorem, because all $n$ are collinear. (All the points lie in the $x,y$-plane, with the equations as given at Mathworld. The sphere is just constructed so that the circle where it intersects with the $x,y$-plane is the Schinzel Circle with $n$ lattice points, and the rest of it has no lattice points.)

The answer to your third question is that it is, by default, the integer lattice (of all points $(a,b,c) \in \mathbb{R}^3$ such that $a, b, c \in \mathbb{Z}$.) But by applying a linear transformation to get to any lattice you like, you get ellipses (in the plane) or ellipsoids (in 3-space) with the same property; if your lattice has an orthonormal basis, then you'll get spheres again.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.