I’m working through Grünbaum and Shepard’s Tilings & Patterns and I have been unable to make much progress on this problem.
Does there exist a tiling that is monohedral and monogonal, but is neither isohedral nor isogonal?
I suspect there is not a tiling that is both monohedral and monogonal but neither isohedral nor isogonal based on all the monohedral and monogonal tilings I’ve been able to find. However, I’m unable to formulate any sort of proof as to why.
The way I’ve been attempting to prove it is by starting with a vertex and its incident edges and seeing when it is possible to “tile” the plane with it while producing a monohedral tiling. For example, I’ve found that every possible configuration of three edges that meet together at a single vertex can “tile” the plane monohedrally (as well as isohedrally and isogonally) by forming hexagons. However, I’m not sure this is a feasible route especially since I’m unsure if there exist k-valent tilings in which k is not 3, 4, or 6.
Something I think may be useful but am not sure how to use is that due to the monogolality of the tiling all angles and edges of the prototile must meet at every vertex and therefore be present in every vertex-incident edge “tile”.
Monohedral: every tile in the tiling is the same.
Monogonal: every vertex and its incident edges (the edges connected to the vertex) forms a figure that is congruent to every other vertex and its incident edges.
Isohedral: every tile can be mapped to any other tile using only symmetries of the tiling (imagine tracing out the tiling on a separate sheet of paper and then being able to line up any tile on your paper to any tile on the original and still have the tracing line up with the original everywhere).
Isogonal: every vertex can be mapped to any other vertex of the tiling using only symmetries of the tiling (like isohedral but with vertices).