Panel — where it appears
Named by 43 essays across 8 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
Panels instead of paper
Flat-foldability asks whether a pattern can reach a flat state. Rigid-foldability asks whether it can get there without any face bending on the way. The second is much stronger, and everything that gets manufactured lives inside it.
The sheet has two sides
Read a crease pattern as a set of panels rather than a set of lines and a condition appears that no vertex theorem states: the panels take two colours, no crease has the same colour on both sides, and the colour is which face of the paper each panel ends up showing.
A curve has no panels
A rigid folding is a finite list of flat pieces joined along lines. A curved crease has no such list, and refining one does not help: the kink at each joint falls as one over the segment count, and the total of the kinks does not fall at all, because it is a constant of the curve.
Paper through paper
Every test the subject has for rigid folding is a statement about a neighbourhood, and a neighbourhood cannot see the far side of the sheet. So a pattern can satisfy all of them while driving one panel straight through another, and the sharpest witness has no interior vertex in it at all.
Closing is not building
A quadrilateral mesh solved so that every loop closes to within a millionth of a radian is a mesh whose fold angles are consistent. It is not necessarily an object. One of the six solved here drives a panel through another at every angle of its motion — there is no part of the fold at which it could be made of solid panels — and the pair that crosses is two steps apart in the sheet, where nothing evaluated at a vertex could see it.
The pile, not the panel
Every technique for building a fold out of panels with depth is drawn, described and priced at one crease between two panels. A folded model has two layers nowhere except at its last fold: the printed patterns here reach eight, sixteen, thirty-two and sixty, and the length a thick panel has to find at those creases is not the published allowance but fifty-nine times it.
No height to swap
A folded strip is a permutation of segments, and the smallest change a hand can make to it is a swap of two heights: 672 stackings, 560 of them isolated. A folded sheet has no height. Its layers are ordered by statements about which panels share ground, and on every printed pattern the search can finish, the answer is one stacking and no way out of it.
The rim lies over less
A folded sheet's boundary is usually discussed as the place the theorems stop applying. It is also visible in the pile: a panel carrying a raw edge of the paper lies over fewer of the other panels than one that does not, on every printed pattern that has both kinds — 18.0 against 21.0 on a Miura, 31.0 against 37.7 on a waterbomb tessellation, and never once the other way round.
Twelve creases a micrometre long
A patch this collection has drawn for a long time carries a hundred and forty-two creases and a hundred and thirty arcs, and nobody had asked what the other twelve were. They are fragments left where the clip caught a pleat almost exactly at a corner — between one and nine micrometres long on a printed sheet, at one turn angle out of four, and it is the turn the collection prints.
The crease the drawing cannot show
Twelve creases on a printed crease pattern are eight millionths of a sheet long. They are in every count the collection takes of that patch, they pass every theorem, and no printer resolves them and no hand folds them. They are also the only thing holding the folded sheet together.
The motion has no letters to choose
A flat-folding search picks a letter for every crease and can pick badly. A rigid folding does not pick anything: the fold angles are real numbers, determined by the panels through equations that have a solution or do not. Replacing a discrete choice with a continuous solve removes every ordering question at once, and introduces a failure of its own.
What the rim was doing
One rectangle of a twist tessellation, cut out of the plane in the ordinary way, gives up a consistent lettering in forty-eight steps. Join its opposite edges so that no crease is divided and the same drawing, at the same vertices, under the same conditions, takes fifty-six thousand seven hundred and seventy-two. The edge of the paper was never the difficulty. It was the slack.
A loop that goes somewhere
Every crease says which of its two panels lies above the other, and a loop in those statements is a proof that the pattern has no flat folded state. On a sheet with no edge that sentence is false. The loops of a periodic pattern carry a lattice step each, and a loop that ends one cell to the right is not a contradiction — it is a stack of paper with no bottom layer.
The lettering that was proved impossible
A search closed its whole tree on a glued square tessellation and reported that no mountain-and-valley assignment of it is consistent. Written onto ordinary patches of one, four and nine periods and handed to the four vertex theorems and a folded sheet rebuilt from scratch, the assignment it says cannot exist passes every check, on four tilings, up to fifteen hundred creases.
A sheet with no edge
A twist tessellation repeats, so a rectangle of it is a description of the whole plane rather than a piece of paper. Joining the rectangle's opposite sides makes that explicit and produces an object every gate in this collection can read: twenty-five drawn panels become sixteen, forty crease pieces become thirty-two, sixteen vertices are all interior, and the three counts add to nothing.
The rim is four letters a cell
Cut a rectangle out of a tessellation and it asks exactly the vertices the tessellation asks, exactly the same questions. What it adds is four free letters for every period of edge — the creases the cut divides, which become two independently answerable creases instead of one. Eight letters on a two-period square, sixteen on a four-period one, and nothing else about the two objects differs at all.
The bottom layer is at the rim
A hundred and sixty-nine panels of folded tessellation, and three of them have nothing underneath. All three touch the paper's edge, and the same is true on every tiling at every size measured. Which panel is at the bottom of a stack turns out to be a fact about where the sheet was cut rather than about the pattern, and the pattern itself has no bottom at all.
One step per panel is a table size
Four families of crease pattern search at exactly one step per panel — a grid at nine sizes, a leaf, a Miura, six crumples — and it was read as a law about patterns that fill their own sheet. It is a number: the conditions at each of their vertices admit eight labellings. Where the conditions admit four, the cost is half. Where they admit thirty, it moves again, and the same pattern at two proportions demonstrates it with everything else held still.
Six creases and the same straight line
The one family here whose vertices are degree six was said to break the arithmetic that every other family obeys, on the strength of a single pattern. Built as a family — six sizes from twenty-one panels to a hundred and nineteen — the Yoshimura is exactly as linear as a grid, with no decision ever withdrawn. What degree changes is the constant, and it changes it in both directions depending on one angle.
Pruning on proofs alone
A search that discards a branch it cannot prove wrong is not a search. Deciding whether a periodic pattern's layer relations really contradict themselves is far dearer than the disc's one-pass test, so the cheap test is asked first — it is sufficient, so it settles almost everything — and the expensive one runs only on what the cheap one rejects. Five of nine steps on a small cell, fifty thousand of fifty-seven on a large one.
The cost of proving something false
A search closing its whole tree is the strongest result this collection can produce, and on a glued tessellation it produces one that is wrong. What it costs to reach is three steps at one period, thirty-five at four, three thousand four hundred and fifty-five at nine, and more than two hundred thousand at sixteen — growing far faster than the cost of finding the lettering it says does not exist.
Where you cut hardly matters
Slide the same rectangle across one whole period of the same tessellation and every position gives a different patch: different creases divided, different half-panels round the edge, panel counts from forty-nine to sixty-one. The cost of lettering them runs from twenty-five steps to thirty-three. Whether a cut is made changes the answer by three orders of magnitude; where it falls changes it by a third.
Folding it flat is one similarity
Where a cell of paper goes when a twist tessellation collapses is a scale and a turn: multiply the plane's lattice by 0.410373441 and rotate it by 36.62°. That is the answer on the square grid, the triangular grid, the honeycomb, the elongated triangular tiling and the rhombille alike, agreeing to eight figures — while the collection's other answer to how much smaller it gets gives those five tilings five different numbers.
The edge was not what made it hard
Five families of pattern searched at one step per panel and a tessellation patch did not, and the property left standing after four alternatives were killed was having a rim. Measured under a fixed letter order the patches cost between a half and two-thirds of a step per panel, at every tiling and every size — below the line rather than above it, and the rim is why.
The designer's grid is the dearest thing here
Two hundred and fifty-six panels of box-pleating grid take two hundred and fifty-six search steps to letter — exactly one per panel, at every size from two divisions to sixteen, with not one decision withdrawn. That is the most any pattern in this collection costs per panel of paper. A twist tessellation costs half of it, and a tilted corrugation a quarter.
A count is not a length
Cut a rectangle out of a tessellation and it reports fifty per cent more creases than the pattern has, then twenty-five, then seventeen — converging on the truth from above and never reaching it. The crease length per unit area it reports is exact at every size, because the two halves of a divided crease add back up. One measurement survives the cut and the other does not.
An order with no least element
Enumerating every way a folded pattern can be stacked works by building upward from a panel with nothing below it. The smallest square twist patch has exactly one such stacking and takes eleven thousand steps to find it. The pattern that patch was cut from has no panel with nothing below it at all, so the enumeration has nothing to start from — and the sheet is perfectly well stacked anyway.
A test imported without its hypothesis
The rule that a loop in a folded sheet's layer relations proves the pattern cannot fold arrives from the layer-ordering literature, where the sheet is a disc and the panels are finitely many. This collection took the rule and not the sentence that says which sheets it is about, then applied it for years to patterns whose whole interest is that they repeat.
Nothing grown was cut out of anything
A leaf's corrugation costs twelve steps on twelve panels, sixteen on sixteen, twenty on twenty, twenty-four on twenty-four — exactly one per panel at every geometry, which is the most any pattern here costs. A tessellation patch costs half that, and the reason is that somebody cut it out of something. A leaf's creases stop at the margin because the plant stopped there.
The seam carries a sign
A loop of paper folds flat when it has an even number of creases round it. A Möbius band folds flat when it has an odd number. The drawing is the same in both cases, the creases are the same creases, and what changed is a factor of minus one contributed by the sheet rather than by anything drawn on it.
Half a rim
A rectangle of tessellation cut out of the plane has four edges; glued into a torus it has none. Gluing one pair and leaving the other gives the middle of the scale — the same drawing, the same vertices, the same conditions asked of them, and exactly half the rim. What the rim costs turns out to be measurable per edge rather than only at the ends.
The rim adds up
What one glued pair of a cell's edges saves in free letters is what the other pair saves, and gluing both saves the sum. That is a rate rather than an observation, it is the form of the claim two objects could never support, and it is what makes 'the rim costs four letters a cell' a statement about tessellations rather than about one drawing.
Euler counts the gluing
Vertices minus creases plus panels comes to one on a rectangle of paper and nought on any gluing of it. That is the cheapest check that an identification did what it says, it costs three counts already being made, and it is what found a crease running exactly through the corner of a cell — a case the corner search could not see and no other check would have noticed.
A grid that will not close
Take the simplest crease pattern there is — a square grid — and join a cell of it into a torus. With an even number of squares across it folds. With an odd number it has no flat folded state at all, and the obstruction is a parity that has nothing to do with the pattern being difficult, because a grid is not difficult.
One node per panel, with the rim gone
A rectangle of repeating pattern cut out of the plane costs exactly one node of search per panel, on every family and at every size. Take the rim away and the total falls and the cost per panel rises, because the letters that were removed were the ones that could not be wrong.
A cut is surgery
Two cuts that look identical on the paper do completely different things to the sheet. A slit run inward from the rim changes nothing at all; a closed cut in the middle removes a disc and leaves a sheet carrying a condition it did not have before. What separates them is not the length of the cut or how much paper it removes.
Two holes are two conditions
One hole in a sheet of paper gives one loop that cannot be shrunk and one parity to satisfy. Two holes give two, and they are independent: an arrangement of creases can satisfy the condition round one hole and fail the condition round the other, and the sheet refuses on the strength of the one it failed.
A tessellation on a cylinder
A twist tessellation has been drawn here as a patch and as a torus, and never as anything in between. Gluing one pair of a cell's edges gives the family its first sheet with exactly two edges — the shape every folded tube actually has, and the only object in the collection that can say whether the rim's cost is linear in how much rim there is.
A bottom layer on half a rim
The bottom of a folded stack lives at the paper's edge, which is why a sheet with no edge has an order with no least element. A cylinder has half a rim, so it has a bottom — and the count of panels that could be it falls with the rim, which makes the claim a measurement rather than a boundary case.
The arc that arrived twice
Which of two panels a crease calls its near one is decided by the order a face walk happened to number them, and the mirrored record is the same relation. Except on one sheet, where it is not — and that sheet turned out to be the one whose folded state comes back the other way up, which is how a duplicate in a graph became a diagnosis.
The drawing does not say what is glued
One crease pattern, four sheets, four different answers to whether it folds — and nothing in the drawing distinguishes them. The identification is data the picture cannot carry, and the picture is the object this collection has been treating as complete.
The symmetry a gluing adds
A patch of a tessellation has whatever symmetry its outline allows — a few reflections, a rotation or two. Glue its edges and it acquires translations, and a lettering of the glued sheet has to be invariant under them. That is a much stronger requirement than a lettering of the patch, and it is why one answer covers every patch at once.
Two panels that are one panel
Paper cannot pass through paper, and every test for it compares pairs of panels. On a glued sheet two pieces of the drawing can be the same piece of paper — so a test that does not know the identification either reports a collision between a panel and itself, or misses one where the sheet meets itself round the loop.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
BoundaryPeriodicityTessellationInterior vertexLayer orderAssignmentGluingSearch costCrease assignmentCrease patternPatchConstraint