Labeling n-Cubes: 2ⁿ - 1 Ways to Arrange Vertices

  • Thread starter Thread starter e(ho0n3
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on determining the number of ways to label the vertices of an n-cube while maintaining the property that adjacent vertices differ by one bit in their binary representation. Initially, a formula was proposed, but it was later deemed incorrect. The corrected approach involves recognizing that each vertex has n adjacent vertices, allowing for n! permutations of these labels while keeping one vertex's label fixed. With 2ⁿ possible labels for the fixed vertex, the total number of valid labelings is n! * 2ⁿ. The sequence generated by this labeling method aligns with established mathematical sequences.
e(ho0n3
Messages
1,349
Reaction score
0
I need some closure on this one:

In how many ways can the vertices of an n-cube be labeled 0, … ,2ⁿ - 1 so that there is an edge between two vertices if and only if the binary representation of their labels differs in exactly one bit?

Let G be an appropriately labeled n-cube. Pick an arbitrary vertex v in G. How many ways can one change labels of the vertices appart from v in G and still mantain the properties of the n-cube? Because of the nature of G, there are n incident edges on v with n adjacent vertices. The labels of these vertices differ from the label of v by one bit. If one swaps the labels of two of these vertices and makes the appropriate swaps elsewhere so as to maintain the n-cube (which can be done due to the symmetry of G), one obtains a new labeling. The number of combination of adjacent vertices that can be swapped is n(n - 1)/2, so the number of different labelings of the vertices in G without changing the label of v is n(n - 1)/2.

The label of vertex v is arbitrary. Therefore, for every possible label of v there are n(n - 1)/2 labelings of the vertices in G. Because there are 2ⁿ - 1 possible labels for v, the number of possible labelings for the vertices in G is (2ⁿ - 1)(n - 1)n/2.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Interesting link. I just realized the formula I gave is pure BS (for one thing, the possible labels for a vertex v in G is 2ⁿ and even with this mod. the formula doesn't work). I'll have to look at this again...
 
Last edited:
OK. I think I have it know. Suppose G is an n-cube, appropriately labeled. Let v be a vertex in G. In how many ways can I change the labels of the vertices in G without changing the label of v? There are n adjecent vertices to v. I can move the labels of these vertices around (making the appropriate changes to rest of G) and obtain a new labeling of the vertices in G in n! ways. Since the label of v can be one of 2ⁿ possibilities, the number of different vertex-labelings in G is n!2ⁿ.

The sequence generated seems to be the same as that in:
http://www.research.att.com/cgi-bin/access.cgi/as/njas/sequences/eismum.cgi
 
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...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top