Talk:Möbius–Kantor graph

A fact from Möbius–Kantor graph appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 28 September 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that it is not possible to configure two mutually inscribed quadrilaterals in the Euclidean plane, but the Möbius–Kantor graph (pictured) describes a solution in the complex projective plane?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2007/September.

Wikipedia

S. Kantor

What was S. Kantor's first name? --romanm (talk) 11:12, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The original paper just says that it's by "S. Kantor in Prague" [1]. But at least going by what Gropp (a historian of configurations) says here, it was "Seligmann". I'll add that to the article. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:14, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

looks like a coin purse

Is there a relationship? https://img1.etsystatic.com/000/0/5561776/il_570xN.179927417.jpg Slashdottir (talk) 00:57, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean but I think that the resemblance is more coincidental than meaningful. The coin purse doesn't have connections that carry all the way across the center from one inner point to another, and the graph can be drawn in other ways with very different symmetries (e.g. see the torus drawing later in the article). —David Eppstein (talk) 01:16, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"cubical graph" is HIGHLY CONFUSING

David Eppstein: I originally wrote "cube". But a cube is a three-dimensional solid; and I didn't want to write "cubic graph" because, as you say, that means something different. Then I noticed the term "cubical graph", linked thus, a few lines higher up the page, so I used that. (Weirdly, the hover text reads "In geometry, a circle is a three-dimensional solid object bounded by six square faces ...".) Maproom (talk) 20:58, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The text of the redirect "cubical graph" does not even mention the phrase "cubical graph". It calls it "the cube graph". "Cubical graph" has been used by Tutte to mean the same thing as cubic graph (that is, any 3-regular graph) [2] and by Harary to mean a subgraph of a hypercube graph [3]. I don't think it can be assumed to mean "the graph of the cube". It is true that MathWorld uses it in that way [4] but I think they use too many neologisms to be considered reliable for this sort of terminological issue. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:07, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regular maps

I wonder if diagrams showing the M-K graph's embeddings in the double- and triple-torus as regular maps would be useful to the article. I could upload the versions at https://www.weddslist.com/rmdb/images/R2/8-3n.svg and at https://www.weddslist.com/rmdb/images/R3/12-3n.svg . Maproom (talk) 19:50, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those would definitely be clearer than the recently-added drawings of low-genus embeddings that show the face cycles but not the surfaces. So please go ahead, but use them to replace those drawings rather than in addition to them. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:09, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What's the copyright status on the images on Wedd's list? I can't find any release that would give the permissions for derivative works to be uploaded to commons on the website. AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 20:10, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]