Waste less time on Facebook — follow Brilliant.
×

Rolling an Archimedean Die

Suppose we construct a die in the shape of a cuboctahedron:

Anyone have any idea how to calculate the theoretical probability that when we roll it, it will land on a triangle as opposed to a square?


Image credit: http://www.korthalsaltes.com/

Note by Geoff Pilling
11 months, 2 weeks ago

No vote yet
1 vote

  Easy Math Editor

MarkdownAppears as
*italics* or _italics_ italics
**bold** or __bold__ bold

- bulleted
- list

  • bulleted
  • list

1. numbered
2. list

  1. numbered
  2. list
Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly
paragraph 1

paragraph 2

paragraph 1

paragraph 2

[example link](https://brilliant.org)example link
> This is a quote
This is a quote
    # I indented these lines
    # 4 spaces, and now they show
    # up as a code block.

    print "hello world"
# I indented these lines
# 4 spaces, and now they show
# up as a code block.

print "hello world"
MathAppears as
Remember to wrap math in \( ... \) or \[ ... \] to ensure proper formatting.
2 \times 3 \( 2 \times 3 \)
2^{34} \( 2^{34} \)
a_{i-1} \( a_{i-1} \)
\frac{2}{3} \( \frac{2}{3} \)
\sqrt{2} \( \sqrt{2} \)
\sum_{i=1}^3 \( \sum_{i=1}^3 \)
\sin \theta \( \sin \theta \)
\boxed{123} \( \boxed{123} \)

Comments

Sort by:

Top Newest

If it were just a function of relative surface area then the probability that it would land on a square face would be \(\dfrac{3 - \sqrt{3}}{2} \approx 0.634\), but this of course does not take into account the mechanics of actually rolling a cuboctahedron. The square sides offer a more stable base so it would take more angular momentum to roll from this state onto a triangle, but as the square has one extra side there would be more directions in which to roll. A precise calculation would appear unlikely, so I would probably just go ahead and roll it 100 times and see how it compares to the \(0.634\) value. (I don't have such a solid to experiment with but if I were to make a guess, I would anticipate a square probability of in excess of \(0.75\).)

Brian Charlesworth - 11 months, 2 weeks ago

Log in to reply

That's an interesting experiment! I wonder what the results are like.

I've wondered if it is sufficient to project the edges onto a sphere, and then take the "sector surface area" as the relative probabilities (scale to a sum of 1). In a sense, I feel that accounts for 1) Landing on a vertex and spinning, 2) Landing on an edge, 3) Landing on a face.

(Though, this doesn't change the "actual surface area relative probabilities" by much)

Calvin Lin Staff - 11 months, 2 weeks ago

Log in to reply

Next time I get my hands on a cuboctahedron, I'll definitely give it a go! (At least find the experimental value)

Geoff Pilling - 11 months, 2 weeks ago

Log in to reply

Depends on the thing's mass, bouncy-ness, angular momentum, and momentum. You can say the momentums are random within a certain range, but mass and bouncyness are still variables. Are you asking us to calculate it in terms of mass and bouncyness?

Ez Money - 7 months ago

Log in to reply

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...