Partitioning high-dimensional space

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jblade
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Space
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of partitioning high-dimensional spaces, specifically focusing on how to divide an n-dimensional "parallelepiped" into equal parts. Participants explore the implications of dimensionality on partitioning and the challenges associated with defining regions in spaces with dimensions greater than three.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how to partition a high-dimensional space, particularly whether it is a "hyper-rectangle" or "hypersphere."
  • Another participant suggests that partitioning should be considered in terms of dividing edges of a "parallelopiped" into equal parts, leading to a formula for the number of parts based on dimensionality.
  • There is a proposal to divide a 1000-dimensional space into four equal parts, with specific ranges for each part across all dimensions, although this raises questions about the validity of such divisions.
  • A participant provides examples of how to define parts in an n-dimensional "parallelepiped," illustrating the complexity of defining boundaries in high dimensions.
  • Some participants note that while it is possible to divide spaces into equal parts, the method of division may differ from lower dimensions, and equal division of edges may not always yield equal volumes in higher dimensions.
  • There is acknowledgment that arbitrary divisions are possible, but the specifics of how to reference and define these parts remain a point of discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying opinions on the feasibility and methods of partitioning high-dimensional spaces. While some agree on the potential for division, there is no consensus on the best approach or the implications of dimensionality on the nature of the partitions.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in understanding how to apply familiar concepts from lower dimensions to higher dimensions, particularly regarding the equal division of edges and the resulting shapes of the partitions.

jblade
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hello to all,
I know (as almost anyone) how to divide an square in let's say 4 equal parts, a cube in 8 or more, i.e. sub-squares and sub-cubes respectively. But a high dimensional space? :confused: . ..I mean where dimensions are >>3, for example 100 or 1000?. In fact I don't know if the space is "hyper-rectangle" or "hypersphere". Probably this second part (to know or determine the shape of the hyperspace) is another question...

I apologise if this is not the correct forum, then I'll apreciate if you can suggest another forum to post this/these questions :redface:

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The only way I can make sense of your question is to assume you are asking about partitioning an n-dimensional "parallelapiped".

If you divide each edge into n parts, then you divide the entire figure into:
dim 2: n2 parts
dim 3: n3 parts
dim 4: n4 parts
.
.
.
dim 1000: n1000 parts.

Get the idea?

You have to be dividing into parallelopipeds (your "hyper-rectangles"). Spheres and "hyper-spheres" won't partition space.
 
First than all thanks for helping to clarify this subject.

Let's see, if I have a dim=1000 space where each dimension is 100 units length, is it possible to divide it in 4 (or any arbitrary number of) independent and equally sized parts? and if so, how can I reference each of these "parts".

I mean, is it correct to say

part 1: (0,25) in all 1000 dimmensions
part 2: (25,50) in all 1000 dimmensions
part 3: (50,75) in all 1000 dimmensions
part 4: (75,100) in all 1000 dimmensions

just as it would happens in 2 and 3 d cubes.
:confused:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
May be it will help.

Let we have n-dimensional "parallelepiped".

part 1: [tex]0< x_1< 1, 0< x_2< 1,... 0< x_{n-1}< 1, 0< x_n< 1[/tex],

part 2: [tex]0< x_1< 1, 0< x_2< 1,... 0< x_{n-1}< 1, 1< x_n< 2[/tex],

part 3: [tex]0< x_1< 1, 0< x_2< 1,... 1< x_{n-1}< 2, 0< x_n< 1[/tex],

part 4: [tex]0< x_1< 1, 0< x_2< 1,... 1< x_{n-1}< 2, 1< x_n< 2[/tex],

part 5: [tex]0< x_1< 1, 0< x_2< 1,... 1< x_{n-2}< 2, 0< x_{n-1}< 1, 0< x_n< 1[/tex],
...

part [tex]n^{999}[/tex]: [tex]0< x_1< 0, 999< x_2< 1000,... 999< x_{n-1}< 1000, 999< x_n< 1000[/tex],
...

part [tex]n^{1000}[/tex] -1: [tex]999< x_1< 1000, 999< x_2< 1000,... 999< x_{n-1}< 1000, 998< x_n< 999[/tex]

part [tex]n^{1000}[/tex]: [tex]999< x_1< 1000, 999< x_2< 1000,... 999< x_{n-1}< 1000, 999< x_n< 1000[/tex]


You can replace "<" by "<=".
 
Last edited:
jblade said:
First than all thanks for helping to clarify this subject.

Let's see, if I have a dim=1000 space where each dimension is 100 units length, is it possible to divide it in 4 (or any arbitrary number of) independent and equally sized parts? and if so, how can I reference each of these "parts".

I mean, is it correct to say

part 1: (0,25) in all 1000 dimmensions
part 2: (25,50) in all 1000 dimmensions
part 3: (50,75) in all 1000 dimmensions
part 4: (75,100) in all 1000 dimmensions

just as it would happens in 2 and 3 d cubes.
:confused:
It doesn't make sense to say "each dimension is 100 units length". I assume you meant to say "there is an edge of the parallelopiped in the direction of each axis having length 100 units.
Now, when you say " divide it in 4 (or any arbitrary number of) independent and equally sized parts?" do you mean divide the parallelopiped into 4 equal parts? That's how I would interpret it but your "part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4" seems to be dividing each edge into 4 parts: that divides the parallelopiped into 41000 equal parts.

In particular I am puzzled by your "just as it would happens in 2 and 3 d cubes.". It is true that, since 22= 4, you can divide a square into 4 equal parts by dividing each side into 2 equal parts. Since n3= 4 does not have any integer solution, there is no way to divide a 3-d cube into 4 identical parts by dividing each edge into equal parts. You might well be able to do it by dividing different edges into different numbers of (non-equal) parts. The same is true for 10000 dimensional space.
 
Thanks again,
Effectively a "hyper-figure" can be divided in equally sized parts by using 2^n parts, where n is the dimensionality.
So a 2d square can be divided into 2^4 equally sized parts, a 3d cube in 2^3 that is 8 little equally sized cubes. But is is partially true, as a 2d square can be divided into just 2 equally sized rectangles (or subspaces or sub areas), and a 3d squared space or cube can be divided into 2 big subcubes and also in 4 3d rectangles o (prisms?).
Example:
For a cube with one vertice in the origin, the exteme coordinates for each edge are in (100, 100, 100) for x, y,z axis, it can be divided into 4 equally sized parts. To help me explain I made an illustration. I know how to handle each one by its coordinates, ie. I know the region in the "delimited space" they occupy.

So I wonder if for higher dimensions it is still possible to make something as illustrated and hence to be able to handle each part individually and how :smile:

I apologise if the vocabulary is not technically acceptable, I should tell I am not expert in this subject. But as I want to learn and dissipate ignorance I ask :rolleyes: , and appreciate your time to answer.
 

Attachments

  • 3dCube.JPG
    3dCube.JPG
    7.7 KB · Views: 483
I admit that in the example each edge is not equally divided, otherwise it would be imposible to divide a 3d into 4 parts as HallsofIvy said.
But any way it is possible to divide the 3d space into arbitrary number of regions.
 
For example you want to divide n-dimensional "parallelepiped" in s parts.

part 1: [tex]0<x<\frac{1000}{s},0<y<1000,0<z<1000,...,0<t<1000[/tex]
part 2: [tex]\frac{1000}{s}<x<\frac{2000}{s},0<y<1000,0<z<1000,...,0<t<1000[/tex]
...
part s: [tex]1000-\frac{1000}{s}<x<1000,0<y<1000,0<z<1000,...,0<t<1000[/tex]

If you want then you can divide x,y dimensions or y,z dimensions (your figure).
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K