Origami number — where it appears
Named by 6 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
The numbers a fold reaches
Folding solves cubics, which is one fact about one fold. The reason the subject has a theory rather than a bag of tricks is a second fact about all of them: the lengths a folder can mark are closed under addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, square roots and cube roots. Constructions can therefore be built out of constructions — and no tower of them ever arrives at a fifth root.
Twos and threes run out
A fold reaches a number exactly when the degree of its equation is a product of twos and threes, which sounds like a large set because it is infinite and because it is so much larger than the compass's. Counted, the reachable degrees are the lattice points under a straight line, so there are about half a log-squared of them: twenty of the first hundred, a hundred and forty-two of the first million. The share falls from a fifth to one part in seven thousand, and the factor by which folding beats the compass rises at every decade without ever settling.
Gauss's polygon is the expensive one
Which regular polygons a fold reaches is a condition on the factorisation of Euler's totient, and every polygon that passes it also has a height — the number of extension steps the shortest tower to it takes. Read that column instead of the verdict and the field inverts: the heptagon, which no compass reaches, costs one step; the seventeen-sided polygon that made Gauss famous costs three, the most on the list; and the polygons a compass finds easy are the ones a folder pays most for.
The axiom that reaches furthest wastes most
The field of origami numbers is defined on an unbounded plane and a folder has a square. Counted axiom set by axiom set on the same sheet, the share of crossings that land off the paper rises with every axiom added: nothing at all from the first two, fifty-seven per cent from the four linear ones at a single round, and seventy-six per cent from the conic axiom at a single round — more, in one round, than the linear four lose in two. The instrument that reaches furthest into the field delivers the smallest share of what it specifies.
A fold is worth what follows it
After one round of folds from a bare square the sheet carries nine references and twelve lines, and a second round of the four linear axioms offers eighty new folds. Made alone, the best of them adds six references and the average two and a half. Made all together they add 556 — nearly seven a fold — because a fold's yield is mostly its crossings with the folds that come after it. So the value of choosing has to be measured along an order: always making the most productive fold next reaches half the round in 28 folds where a random order takes 51, and all of it in 52, which is the fewest folds that can. The conic axiom's 305 extra folds leave the first eight choices exactly as they were.
Each new fold can cross every old one
A folder choosing each fold from the second round's fixed menu needs fifty-two folds for the round's 565 references, and no fewer. Let the menu grow — after every fold, every fold the references now on the paper specify — and the count obeys a bound that has nothing to do with axioms: a new line can cross each line already through the paper once, and the rim twice. After k folds that is at most 9 + k(k + 11)/2 references. The greedy folder meets the bound exactly at every one of thirty folds, passes 565 at the twenty-ninth, and no twenty-eight folds of any kind can. But of its 589 references only fifteen are the round's, and they are nearly useless: the median lies a seventieth of a millimetre from its nearest neighbour.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
The axiomsField extensionReachable setReference pointConstructionCrossingCube rootThe Huzita–Hatori axiomsClosureConstructible numberConstructible polygonCounting