Infinite Regular Skew Polyhedra
There are 3 regular skew polyhedra, the first two being duals:
- {4,6|4}: 6 squares on a vertex (related to cubic honeycomb, constructed by cubic cells, removing two opposite faces from each, and linking sets of six together around a faceless cube.)
- {6,4|4}: 4 hexagons on a vertex (related to bitruncated cubic honeycomb, constructed by truncated octahedron with their square faces removed and linking hole pairs of holes together.)
- {6,6|3}: 6 hexagons on a vertex (related to quarter cubic honeycomb, constructed by truncated tetrahedron cells, removing triangle faces, and linking sets of four around a faceless tetrahedron.)
Also solutions to the equation above are the Euclidean regular tilings {3,6}, {6,3}, {4,4}, represented as {3,6|6}, {6,3|6}, and {4,4|∞}.
Here are some partial representations, vertical projected views of their skew vertex figures, and partial corresponding uniform honeycombs.
| Partial polyhedra | ||
|---|---|---|
{4,6|4} |
{6,4|4} |
{6,6|3} |
| Vertex figures | ||
{4,6} |
{6,4} |
{6,6} |
| Related convex uniform honeycombs | ||
Runcinated cubic honeycomb t0,3{4,3,4} |
Bitruncated cubic t1,2{4,3,4} |
quarter cubic honeycomb t0,1{3} |
Read more about this topic: Regular Skew Polyhedron
Famous quotes containing the words infinite and/or regular:
“In a symbol there is concealment and yet revelation: here therefore, by silence and by speech acting together, comes a double significance.... In the symbol proper, what we can call a symbol, there is ever, more or less distinctly and directly, some embodiment and revelation of the Infinite; the Infinite is made to blend itself with the Finite, to stand visible, and as it were, attainable there. By symbols, accordingly, is man guided and commanded, made happy, made wretched.”
—Thomas Carlyle (1795–1881)
“While you’re playing cards with a regular guy or having a bite to eat with him, he seems a peaceable, good-humoured and not entirely dense person. But just begin a conversation with him about something inedible, politics or science, for instance, and he ends up in a deadend or starts in on such an obtuse and base philosophy that you can only wave your hand and leave.”
—Anton Pavlovich Chekhov (1860–1904)