MHB Counting Color Combinations in 12 Triangles

maxkor
Messages
79
Reaction score
0
There are 12 triangles (picture). We color each side of the triangle in red, green or blue. Among the $3^{24}$ possible colorings, how many have the property that every triangle has one edge of each color?
 

Attachments

  • ry.png
    ry.png
    2.3 KB · Views: 106
Mathematics news on Phys.org
[TIKZ]\coordinate (A) at (30:2) ;
\coordinate (B) at (90:2) ;
\coordinate (C) at (150:2) ;
\coordinate (D) at (210:2) ;
\coordinate (E) at (270:2) ;
\coordinate (F) at (330:2) ;
\coordinate (U) at (0:5) ;
\coordinate (V) at (60:5) ;
\coordinate (W) at (120:5) ;
\coordinate (X) at (180:5) ;
\coordinate (Y) at (240:5) ;
\coordinate (Z) at (300:5) ;
\foreach \point in {A,B,C,D,E,F,U,V,W,X,Y,Z} \fill [black] (\point) circle (3pt) ;
\draw (A) -- (B) -- (C) -- (D) -- (E) -- (F) -- (A) -- (U) -- (V) -- (W) -- (X) -- (Y) -- (Z) -- (U) --(A) -- (V) -- (B) -- (W) -- (C) -- (X) -- (D) -- (Y) -- (E) -- node[ left ]{$x$}(Z) -- node[ right ]{$z$}(F) -- node[ below ]{$y$}(U) ;
\draw (-90:3.5) node{$6$} ;
\foreach \x in {0,30,...,240} \draw (\x:3.5) node{$2$} ;
\draw (270:2.75) node{$A$} ;
\draw (240:2.75) node{$B$} ;
\draw (0:2.75) node{$C$} ;
\draw (330:2.75) node{$D$} ;
\draw (300:2.75) node{$E$} ;[/TIKZ]
Start with the triangle labelled $A$ at the bottom of the diagram. There are 6 ways to colour its three sides in different colours. Next, look at triangle $B$. One of its sides has already been coloured, and there are 2 ways to colour the remaining sides. Continuing in this way clockwise round the diagram, there are two ways to colour each of the triangles up to and including the one labelled $C$. There are now two cases to consider for the remaining triangles $D$ and $E$. If side $x$ in triangle $A$ and side $y$ in triangle $C$ have different colours then there is only one choice for the colour of side $z$ and therefore only 1 way to colour triangles $D$ and $E$. But if $x$ and $y$ have the same colour then there are two choices for the colour of side $z$, and therefore 2 ways to colour triangles $D$ and $E$.

Here's where the argument becomes probabilistic and unreliable. If the colours of $x$ and $y$ had been chosen independently at random, then the probability of them being the same would be $\frac13$, so the expected number of colourings for triangles $D$ and $E$ would be $\frac13*2 + \frac23*1 = \frac43$. Then the expected value for the number of colourings for the whole diagram would be $$6*2^9 * \frac43 = 2^{12}.$$ But in fact the colourings of $x$ and $y$ are not independent. So the above argument is not rigorous, and the answer may not even be correct (though it must be a good approximation!).
 
Opalg said:
[TIKZ]\coordinate (A) at (30:2) ;
\coordinate (B) at (90:2) ;
\coordinate (C) at (150:2) ;
\coordinate (D) at (210:2) ;
\coordinate (E) at (270:2) ;
\coordinate (F) at (330:2) ;
\coordinate (U) at (0:5) ;
\coordinate (V) at (60:5) ;
\coordinate (W) at (120:5) ;
\coordinate (X) at (180:5) ;
\coordinate (Y) at (240:5) ;
\coordinate (Z) at (300:5) ;
\foreach \point in {A,B,C,D,E,F,U,V,W,X,Y,Z} \fill [black] (\point) circle (3pt) ;
\draw (A) -- (B) -- (C) -- (D) -- (E) -- (F) -- (A) -- (U) -- (V) -- (W) -- (X) -- (Y) -- (Z) -- (U) --(A) -- (V) -- (B) -- (W) -- (C) -- (X) -- (D) -- (Y) -- (E) -- node[ left ]{$x$}(Z) -- node[ right ]{$z$}(F) -- node[ below ]{$y$}(U) ;
\draw (-90:3.5) node{$6$} ;
\foreach \x in {0,30,...,240} \draw (\x:3.5) node{$2$} ;
\draw (270:2.75) node{$A$} ;
\draw (240:2.75) node{$B$} ;
\draw (0:2.75) node{$C$} ;
\draw (330:2.75) node{$D$} ;
\draw (300:2.75) node{$E$} ;[/TIKZ]
Start with the triangle labelled $A$ at the bottom of the diagram. There are 6 ways to colour its three sides in different colours. Next, look at triangle $B$. One of its sides has already been coloured, and there are 2 ways to colour the remaining sides. Continuing in this way clockwise round the diagram, there are two ways to colour each of the triangles up to and including the one labelled $C$. There are now two cases to consider for the remaining triangles $D$ and $E$. If side $x$ in triangle $A$ and side $y$ in triangle $C$ have different colours then there is only one choice for the colour of side $z$ and therefore only 1 way to colour triangles $D$ and $E$. But if $x$ and $y$ have the same colour then there are two choices for the colour of side $z$, and therefore 2 ways to colour triangles $D$ and $E$.

Here's where the argument becomes probabilistic and unreliable. If the colours of $x$ and $y$ had been chosen independently at random, then the probability of them being the same would be $\frac13$, so the expected number of colourings for triangles $D$ and $E$ would be $\frac13*2 + \frac23*1 = \frac43$. Then the expected value for the number of colourings for the whole diagram would be $$6*2^9 * \frac43 = 2^{12}.$$ But in fact the colourings of $x$ and $y$ are not independent. So the above argument is not rigorous, and the answer may not even be correct (though it must be a good approximation!).
Almost right :)
 
I now think that the answer should be $2^{12} + 2=4098$, but I don't have a proof of that.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
30
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top