Happy ending problem (polygons)
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I finished reading a book about Paul Erdös "The Man Who Loved Only Numbers" and I came to couple of questions which I need to check if I am understanding them well or not, one of them about what has become known as Happy Ending Problem.
What I understand that according to the formula
$$
2^n-2 + 1
$$
you can know the least numbers of vertices to be able to construct n sided-polygon. If that is right then e.g. let's take $$n = 5 to 2^5-2+1 = 9$$
which means 9 vertices needed to guarantee a pentagon (5 sided-polygon). However, if you have even less vertices you are still able to construct a pentagon (it is not mentioned if it should be regular or irregular) so according to the illustration below we need just as much vertices as the needed-polygon requires.
Please correct me if I misunderstood the problem and feel free to post any link that may clarify the subject and add more details.
graph-theory polygons
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I finished reading a book about Paul Erdös "The Man Who Loved Only Numbers" and I came to couple of questions which I need to check if I am understanding them well or not, one of them about what has become known as Happy Ending Problem.
What I understand that according to the formula
$$
2^n-2 + 1
$$
you can know the least numbers of vertices to be able to construct n sided-polygon. If that is right then e.g. let's take $$n = 5 to 2^5-2+1 = 9$$
which means 9 vertices needed to guarantee a pentagon (5 sided-polygon). However, if you have even less vertices you are still able to construct a pentagon (it is not mentioned if it should be regular or irregular) so according to the illustration below we need just as much vertices as the needed-polygon requires.
Please correct me if I misunderstood the problem and feel free to post any link that may clarify the subject and add more details.
graph-theory polygons
I believe it's about convex polygons. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with that drawing, but the pentagon you drew is not convex.
â bof
Aug 17 at 8:31
I think what they're saying is that, given $9$ points in the plane, no matter how they are arranged (as long as no $3$ are collinear), you can always find $5$ of them which determine a convex pentagon. On the other hand, $8$ points can be arranged so that no $5$ of them make a convex pentagon.
â bof
Aug 17 at 8:36
oh sorry, you're right I just noticed the angle to the left which is more than 180 !
â wisdom
Aug 17 at 9:22
1
The real definition of convex body is that, if two points P, Q lie inside it, then so does the line segment PQ. This applies to figures more general than polygons, so they need not have any angles. Of course the Happy Ending Problem is just about polygons, so your definition is fine.
â bof
Aug 17 at 10:25
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I finished reading a book about Paul Erdös "The Man Who Loved Only Numbers" and I came to couple of questions which I need to check if I am understanding them well or not, one of them about what has become known as Happy Ending Problem.
What I understand that according to the formula
$$
2^n-2 + 1
$$
you can know the least numbers of vertices to be able to construct n sided-polygon. If that is right then e.g. let's take $$n = 5 to 2^5-2+1 = 9$$
which means 9 vertices needed to guarantee a pentagon (5 sided-polygon). However, if you have even less vertices you are still able to construct a pentagon (it is not mentioned if it should be regular or irregular) so according to the illustration below we need just as much vertices as the needed-polygon requires.
Please correct me if I misunderstood the problem and feel free to post any link that may clarify the subject and add more details.
graph-theory polygons
I finished reading a book about Paul Erdös "The Man Who Loved Only Numbers" and I came to couple of questions which I need to check if I am understanding them well or not, one of them about what has become known as Happy Ending Problem.
What I understand that according to the formula
$$
2^n-2 + 1
$$
you can know the least numbers of vertices to be able to construct n sided-polygon. If that is right then e.g. let's take $$n = 5 to 2^5-2+1 = 9$$
which means 9 vertices needed to guarantee a pentagon (5 sided-polygon). However, if you have even less vertices you are still able to construct a pentagon (it is not mentioned if it should be regular or irregular) so according to the illustration below we need just as much vertices as the needed-polygon requires.
Please correct me if I misunderstood the problem and feel free to post any link that may clarify the subject and add more details.
graph-theory polygons
asked Aug 17 at 8:02
wisdom
1363
1363
I believe it's about convex polygons. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with that drawing, but the pentagon you drew is not convex.
â bof
Aug 17 at 8:31
I think what they're saying is that, given $9$ points in the plane, no matter how they are arranged (as long as no $3$ are collinear), you can always find $5$ of them which determine a convex pentagon. On the other hand, $8$ points can be arranged so that no $5$ of them make a convex pentagon.
â bof
Aug 17 at 8:36
oh sorry, you're right I just noticed the angle to the left which is more than 180 !
â wisdom
Aug 17 at 9:22
1
The real definition of convex body is that, if two points P, Q lie inside it, then so does the line segment PQ. This applies to figures more general than polygons, so they need not have any angles. Of course the Happy Ending Problem is just about polygons, so your definition is fine.
â bof
Aug 17 at 10:25
add a comment |Â
I believe it's about convex polygons. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with that drawing, but the pentagon you drew is not convex.
â bof
Aug 17 at 8:31
I think what they're saying is that, given $9$ points in the plane, no matter how they are arranged (as long as no $3$ are collinear), you can always find $5$ of them which determine a convex pentagon. On the other hand, $8$ points can be arranged so that no $5$ of them make a convex pentagon.
â bof
Aug 17 at 8:36
oh sorry, you're right I just noticed the angle to the left which is more than 180 !
â wisdom
Aug 17 at 9:22
1
The real definition of convex body is that, if two points P, Q lie inside it, then so does the line segment PQ. This applies to figures more general than polygons, so they need not have any angles. Of course the Happy Ending Problem is just about polygons, so your definition is fine.
â bof
Aug 17 at 10:25
I believe it's about convex polygons. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with that drawing, but the pentagon you drew is not convex.
â bof
Aug 17 at 8:31
I believe it's about convex polygons. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with that drawing, but the pentagon you drew is not convex.
â bof
Aug 17 at 8:31
I think what they're saying is that, given $9$ points in the plane, no matter how they are arranged (as long as no $3$ are collinear), you can always find $5$ of them which determine a convex pentagon. On the other hand, $8$ points can be arranged so that no $5$ of them make a convex pentagon.
â bof
Aug 17 at 8:36
I think what they're saying is that, given $9$ points in the plane, no matter how they are arranged (as long as no $3$ are collinear), you can always find $5$ of them which determine a convex pentagon. On the other hand, $8$ points can be arranged so that no $5$ of them make a convex pentagon.
â bof
Aug 17 at 8:36
oh sorry, you're right I just noticed the angle to the left which is more than 180 !
â wisdom
Aug 17 at 9:22
oh sorry, you're right I just noticed the angle to the left which is more than 180 !
â wisdom
Aug 17 at 9:22
1
1
The real definition of convex body is that, if two points P, Q lie inside it, then so does the line segment PQ. This applies to figures more general than polygons, so they need not have any angles. Of course the Happy Ending Problem is just about polygons, so your definition is fine.
â bof
Aug 17 at 10:25
The real definition of convex body is that, if two points P, Q lie inside it, then so does the line segment PQ. This applies to figures more general than polygons, so they need not have any angles. Of course the Happy Ending Problem is just about polygons, so your definition is fine.
â bof
Aug 17 at 10:25
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
You should carefully read the Wikipedia entry you linked to.
Note that a pentagon here is a closed simple, i.e., not selfintersecting, circuit consisting of five segments and five vertices. It is neither assumed regular nor even convex.
It is a theorem that among $geq9$ different points in the plane, assumed in general position, i.e., no three in a line, you can always select $5$ that form the vertices of a convex pentagon. On the other hand the devil can place $8$ points in the plane such that no convex pentagon can be selected from them. This is the case for the $8$ points in your figure. It follows that $9$ is the "Ramsey number" for this little geometric problem.
Erdös and Szekeres 1935 conjectured the following generalization: Given $geq2^n-2+1$ points in the plane, assumed in general position, you can always select $n$ of them forming the vertices of a convex $n$-gon. In its full generality this conjecture is still open.
@bof: Thank you for reporting my carelessness. Hope it's o.k. now.
â Christian Blatter
Aug 17 at 8:54
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
You should carefully read the Wikipedia entry you linked to.
Note that a pentagon here is a closed simple, i.e., not selfintersecting, circuit consisting of five segments and five vertices. It is neither assumed regular nor even convex.
It is a theorem that among $geq9$ different points in the plane, assumed in general position, i.e., no three in a line, you can always select $5$ that form the vertices of a convex pentagon. On the other hand the devil can place $8$ points in the plane such that no convex pentagon can be selected from them. This is the case for the $8$ points in your figure. It follows that $9$ is the "Ramsey number" for this little geometric problem.
Erdös and Szekeres 1935 conjectured the following generalization: Given $geq2^n-2+1$ points in the plane, assumed in general position, you can always select $n$ of them forming the vertices of a convex $n$-gon. In its full generality this conjecture is still open.
@bof: Thank you for reporting my carelessness. Hope it's o.k. now.
â Christian Blatter
Aug 17 at 8:54
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
You should carefully read the Wikipedia entry you linked to.
Note that a pentagon here is a closed simple, i.e., not selfintersecting, circuit consisting of five segments and five vertices. It is neither assumed regular nor even convex.
It is a theorem that among $geq9$ different points in the plane, assumed in general position, i.e., no three in a line, you can always select $5$ that form the vertices of a convex pentagon. On the other hand the devil can place $8$ points in the plane such that no convex pentagon can be selected from them. This is the case for the $8$ points in your figure. It follows that $9$ is the "Ramsey number" for this little geometric problem.
Erdös and Szekeres 1935 conjectured the following generalization: Given $geq2^n-2+1$ points in the plane, assumed in general position, you can always select $n$ of them forming the vertices of a convex $n$-gon. In its full generality this conjecture is still open.
@bof: Thank you for reporting my carelessness. Hope it's o.k. now.
â Christian Blatter
Aug 17 at 8:54
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
You should carefully read the Wikipedia entry you linked to.
Note that a pentagon here is a closed simple, i.e., not selfintersecting, circuit consisting of five segments and five vertices. It is neither assumed regular nor even convex.
It is a theorem that among $geq9$ different points in the plane, assumed in general position, i.e., no three in a line, you can always select $5$ that form the vertices of a convex pentagon. On the other hand the devil can place $8$ points in the plane such that no convex pentagon can be selected from them. This is the case for the $8$ points in your figure. It follows that $9$ is the "Ramsey number" for this little geometric problem.
Erdös and Szekeres 1935 conjectured the following generalization: Given $geq2^n-2+1$ points in the plane, assumed in general position, you can always select $n$ of them forming the vertices of a convex $n$-gon. In its full generality this conjecture is still open.
You should carefully read the Wikipedia entry you linked to.
Note that a pentagon here is a closed simple, i.e., not selfintersecting, circuit consisting of five segments and five vertices. It is neither assumed regular nor even convex.
It is a theorem that among $geq9$ different points in the plane, assumed in general position, i.e., no three in a line, you can always select $5$ that form the vertices of a convex pentagon. On the other hand the devil can place $8$ points in the plane such that no convex pentagon can be selected from them. This is the case for the $8$ points in your figure. It follows that $9$ is the "Ramsey number" for this little geometric problem.
Erdös and Szekeres 1935 conjectured the following generalization: Given $geq2^n-2+1$ points in the plane, assumed in general position, you can always select $n$ of them forming the vertices of a convex $n$-gon. In its full generality this conjecture is still open.
edited Aug 17 at 8:55
answered Aug 17 at 8:39
Christian Blatter
165k7109309
165k7109309
@bof: Thank you for reporting my carelessness. Hope it's o.k. now.
â Christian Blatter
Aug 17 at 8:54
add a comment |Â
@bof: Thank you for reporting my carelessness. Hope it's o.k. now.
â Christian Blatter
Aug 17 at 8:54
@bof: Thank you for reporting my carelessness. Hope it's o.k. now.
â Christian Blatter
Aug 17 at 8:54
@bof: Thank you for reporting my carelessness. Hope it's o.k. now.
â Christian Blatter
Aug 17 at 8:54
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2885523%2fhappy-ending-problem-polygons%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
I believe it's about convex polygons. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with that drawing, but the pentagon you drew is not convex.
â bof
Aug 17 at 8:31
I think what they're saying is that, given $9$ points in the plane, no matter how they are arranged (as long as no $3$ are collinear), you can always find $5$ of them which determine a convex pentagon. On the other hand, $8$ points can be arranged so that no $5$ of them make a convex pentagon.
â bof
Aug 17 at 8:36
oh sorry, you're right I just noticed the angle to the left which is more than 180 !
â wisdom
Aug 17 at 9:22
1
The real definition of convex body is that, if two points P, Q lie inside it, then so does the line segment PQ. This applies to figures more general than polygons, so they need not have any angles. Of course the Happy Ending Problem is just about polygons, so your definition is fine.
â bof
Aug 17 at 10:25