|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
a work in progress.......
Quadhall
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'a7.jpg' (166 KB)
Preview of image 'a7.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Quadhall wrote:
>
> a work in progress.......
A pedantic nitpick, but while the red and blue tiles are shaped like
those of a Penrose tiling, they are not arranged in the Penrose pattern.
Regards,
John
--
ICQ: 46085459
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
John VanSickle wrote:
> A pedantic nitpick, but while the red and blue tiles are shaped like
> those of a Penrose tiling, they are not arranged in the Penrose pattern.
Tangentially I wonder whether it's possible to cover a sphere with tiles
topologically equivalent to Penrose's.
--
Anton Sherwood -- br0### [at] p0b0xcom -- http://ogre.nu
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Anton Sherwood wrote:
>
[...]
> Tangentially I wonder whether it's possible to cover a sphere with tiles
> topologically equivalent to Penrose's.
>
I'm no expert in spherical geometry, but that could be possible if you would
distort the single tiles a bit (change angles). The structure of real penrose
tiling is quite irregular, so this could be quite difficult... you will probably
have to work with variable distortion.
I could think of a program where the tiling grows and angles are adaptively
modified to follow a sphere's shape. I'm not sure if that works, probably
things would not fit together in the end.
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I'm sure there must be a way to cover a sphere, but your pattern
too. But You surely know that you can aproximate a sphere by n
equal-sided triangles, where n are some discrete numbers...
I don't know if it will work, to take 2 of these triangles
together, but maybe you can get your' penrose tiling this way to
the sphere ...
hmm ... quite hard to explain, hope you know what I mean...
--
,', Jan Walzer \V/ http://wa.lzer.net ,',
',',' student of >|< mailto:jan### [at] lzernet ',','
' ComputerScience /A\ +49-177-7403863 '
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thanks for pointing that out--->I won't change this image as a result, but
perhaps I will incorportate a true Penrose tiling in a future image. Oh,
and nitpick away, it helps me to learn and stay humble (not that I have much
reason not to be humble). Thanks again.
John VanSickle wrote in message <39725C85.4B510B8E@erols.com>...
>Quadhall wrote:
>>
>> a work in progress.......
>
>A pedantic nitpick, but while the red and blue tiles are shaped like
>those of a Penrose tiling, they are not arranged in the Penrose pattern.
>
>Regards,
>John
>--
>ICQ: 46085459
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 16 Jul 2000 21:08:21 -0400, John VanSickle wrote...
> Quadhall wrote:
> >
> > a work in progress.......
>
> A pedantic nitpick, but while the red and blue tiles are shaped like
> those of a Penrose tiling, they are not arranged in the Penrose pattern.
I thought that the whole point of penrose tiling was that there *was* no
pattern, that you could fling the tiles together almost randomly and
still get them to tesselate...
I could easily be wrong though.
Bye for now,
Jamie.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jamie Davison wrote:
>
[...]
>
> I thought that the whole point of penrose tiling was that there *was* no
> pattern, that you could fling the tiles together almost randomly and
> still get them to tesselate...
>
> I could easily be wrong though.
>
> Bye for now,
> Jamie.
IIRC, penrose tilings have a nonperiodic structure, but they are based on very
simple rules, for example fractint describes penrose tiling with the following
L-System:
Penrose1 {
Angle 10
Axiom +WF--XF---YF--ZF
W=YF++ZF----XF[-YF----WF]++
X=+YF--ZF[---WF--XF]+
Y=-WF++XF[+++YF++ZF]-
Z=--YF++++WF[+ZF++++XF]--XF
F=
}
So there is only one unique penrose tiling, and changing any element, even if
the tiling stays complete, would no more be a real penrose :-)
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jamie Davison wrote:
> I thought that the whole point of penrose tiling was that there *was* no
> pattern, that you could fling the tiles together almost randomly and
> still get them to tesselate...
It's not periodic, but (iirc) every infinite Penrose tiling contains
every finite Penrose tiling -- *because* it is not periodic.
--
Anton Sherwood -- br0### [at] p0b0xcom -- http://ogre.nu/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
John VanSickle wrote:
>
> Quadhall wrote:
> >
> > a work in progress.......
>
> A pedantic nitpick, but while the red and blue tiles are shaped like
> those of a Penrose tiling, they are not arranged in the Penrose pattern.
>
Well, according to this page:
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PenroseTiles.html they're not
even shaped like a Penrose tiling's tiles...
Jerome
--
* Doctor Jekyll had something * mailto:ber### [at] inamecom
* to Hyde... * http://www.enst.fr/~jberger
*******************************
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |