Conway's spiral and a discrete Gömböc with 21 point masses
We show an explicit construction in 3 dimensions for a convex, mono-monostatic polyhedron (i.e., having exactly one stable and one unstable equilibrium) with 21 vertices and 21 faces. This polyhedron is a 0-skeleton, with equal masses located at each vertex. The above construction serves as an upper bound for the minimal number of faces and vertices of mono-monostatic 0-skeletons and complements the recently provided lower bound of 8 vertices. This is the first known construction of a mono-monostatic polyhedral solid. We also show that a similar construction for homogeneous distribution of mass cannot result in a mono-monostatic solid.
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}


\subsection{Mono-stability and homogeneous polyhedra}
If a rigid body has one single stable position then we call it \emph{mono-stable}, and this property was probably first explored by Archimedes as he developed his famous design for ships \cite{Archimedes}.  Mono-stability might also be of advantage for rigid bodies under gravity, supported on a rigid (frictionless) surface, as it  facilitates self-righting. 

Beyond these applications, mono-stable bodies have also attracted  considerable mathematical interest. In particular, in case of
convex polyhedra with homogeneous mass distribution, it is still unclear
what are the minimal numbers $F^S, V^S$ of faces and vertices necessary to achieve mono-stability. Conway and Guy in 1967 \cite{Conway}
offered the first upper bound by describing such an object with $F=19$ faces and $V=34$ vertices. The Conway-Guy construction was improved by Bezdek \cite{Bezdek} to $(F,V)=(18,18)$ and later by Reshetov \cite{Reshetov} to $(F,V)=(14,24)$. The mentioned values of $F$ and $V$ define the best known \emph{upper bounds} for a mono-stable polyhedron, so we have  $F^S \leq 14 , V^S \leq 18$. Even less is known about the lower bounds: the only known result is due to Conway \cite{Dawson} who proved that a homogeneous tetrahedra have at least two stable equilibria, from which $F^S, V^S \geq 5$ follows.

\subsection{Mono-unstable and mono-monostatic homogeneous polyhedra}
 The natural dual property to being mono-stable is being \emph{mono-unstable}, i.e. to have one single unstable static balance position. The Conway-Guy polyhedron has, beyond the single stable position on one face, 4 unstable equilibria at 4 vertices. The first example for a mono-unstable polyhedron  was demonstrated in \cite{balancing}, having $F=18$
 faces and $V=18$ vertices and in the same paper it was proven that a homogeneous tetrahedron can not be mono-unstable. Thus, for the minimal numbers $F^U, V^U$ for the faces and vertices that a homogeneous, mono-unstable polyhedron may have, the following bounds apply:
 $ 5 \leq F^U \leq 18$, $5 \leq V^U \leq  18$.
 
 If a rigid body is either mono-stable or mono-unstable then we call it monostatic.
 If it has both properties, then we call it mono-monostatic.
  The construction of the first convex, homogeneous, mono-monostatic  body  called G\"{o}mb\"{o}c \cite{VarkonyiDomokos} in 2006 raised the interest in the subject, because a polyhedral version of the G\"{o}mb\"{o}c is not known.  This implies that for the minimal numbers
  $F^{\star}, V^{\star}$ for the faces and vertices of a mono-monostatic polyhedron the only known bounds are $F^{\star}, V^{\star} \geq 5.$

\subsection{0-skeletons and the main result}
Here we highlight a new aspect of this problem: instead of looking at uniform mass distribution, we consider polyhedra with unit masses at the vertices, also called polyhedral 0-skeletons. The latter problem may appear, at first sight, almost `unsportingly' easy. However, the minimal vertex number $V^{\star}_0$ and face number $F^{\star}_0$  to produce  a mono-monostatic polyhedral 0-skeleton are not known. Even more curiously, the minimal number of vertices for a mono-monostatic,  \emph{polygonal} 0-skeleton (in 2 dimensions) is not known either.

The first related results have been reported in \cite{Bozoki} where, for the minimal number of vertices $V^{U}_0$ for
a mono-unstable polyhedral 0-skeleton $V^{U}_0 \geq 8$ was proven and this implies the lower bounds
$F^{U}_0 \geq 6$ (via the theorem of Steinitz \cite{Steinitz}) and it also implies the bounds $F^{\star}_0 \geq 6, V^{\star}_0 \geq 8$
for mono-monostatic polyhedral 0-skeletons.

In this paper we explain the background and show some constructions which may inspire further research. In particular, by providing an explicit construction of a mono-monostatic polyhedral 0-skeleton with 21 faces and 21 vertices, we prove

\begin{theorem}\label{th1}
$F^{\star}_0,  V^{\star}_0 \leq 21.$
\end{theorem}
Our example, illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:intro}(c) and defined on line 3 of Table~\ref{tb:monomono},  appears to be the first discrete construction of a mono-monostatic object and it may help to inspire thinking about
the bounds  $F^{\star}, V^{\star}$ for the homogeneous case.

The paper is structured as follows: in Section~\ref{spirals} we explain the geometric idea behind Conway's classical construction and how
this idea may be generalized in various directions. In Section~\ref{skeletons}, by relying on an idea by Dawson \cite{Dawson}, we describe the construction for a mono-monostatic 0-skeleton in 2 dimensions, having $V_0=11$ vertices and then we proceed to prove Theorem \ref{th1} by providing the construction of the mono-monostatic 0-skeleton. In Section~\ref{other} we show the connection to other problems, including the mechanical complexity of polyhedra, and also point out why the particular geometry of our constructions may not be applied to the construction of a homogeneous mono-monostatic polyhedron. In Section~\ref{sum} we draw conclusions.


\section{The geometry of Conway spirals}\label{spirals}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{intro.eps}
\caption{Construction of symmetric, mono-monostatic discs and polyhedra; a) Geometry of the Conway spiral $P_0 , \ldots, P_n$.  $P_0$ is fixed at $z=1$ and each radius $OP_i$ is perpendicular to the corresponding edge $P_{i-1}P_i$. The geometry of the spiral is uniquely described in terms of $n$ angular variables $\alpha_1, \ldots, \alpha_n$; b) 2D mirror-symmetric mono-monostatic polygon with 11 vertices for $n=5$ and $k=2$, see Table~\ref{tb:monomono}, line 6 for numerical data; c) 3D mono-monostatic polyhedron with 5-fold rotational symmetry for $n=4$ and $k=5$, see Table~\ref{tb:monomono}, line 3 for numerical data.}
\label{fig:intro}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

\subsection{The classical Conway double spiral and the Conway-Guy monostable polyhedron}
The essence of the Conway-Guy polyhedron is a remarkable planar construction to which we will briefly refer as the \emph{Conway spiral}, illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:intro}(a). 
In terms of symbols shown in the figure, it can be defined as an open planar polygon $M$ composed of the sequence of points $P_0 , \ldots, P_n$ with $\angle O P_i P_{i-1} = \pi/2$, $i = 1\ldots n$. Without loss of generality, $O$ is considered here as the origin of the coordinate system, all points $P_i$ lie in the plane $xz$ and the coordinates of $P_0$ are fixed at (0,0,1).  
If we consider double Conway spirals generated by reflection symmetry, for the $x$-coordinate
 of center of mass $C$  of any double Conway spiral we have $x_C=0$  and due to the special design, the double Conway spiral is monostatic if and only if $z_C<0$. 
 
The original Conway-Guy construction is equivalent to Figure~\ref{fig:intro}(a) if all central angles are equal, i.e., we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:conway}
\alpha _1 = \alpha _2 =\dots =\alpha _{n+1},
\end{equation}
implying that all triangles $P_iP_{i+1}O$ are similar. This case, to which we refer as the \emph{classical Conway spiral} admits a discrete family of shapes, parametrized by the integer $n$, and a corresponding family of double Conway spirals. 
None of these polygons (interpreted as homogeneous discs rolling along their circumference
on a horizontal plane) is monostatic, i.e., we have $z_C>0$ for all values of $n$,
since convex monostatic, homogeneous discs do not exist \cite{DomokosRuina}. Still, the Conway spiral may be regarded as a \emph{best shot} at a monostatic polyhedral disc with reflection symmetry. The same intuition suggests that a Conway spiral may need minimal added `bottom weight' to become monostatic.

Conway and Guy added this bottom weight by extending the shape into 3D as an oblique prism and they computed the minimal value of $n$ necessary to make
this homogeneous oblique prism (with the cross-section of a classical Conway spiral) monostable as $n=8$, resulting in a homogeneous, convex polyhedron with 34 vertices and 19 faces.


\subsection{The modified Conway double spiral and Dawson's monostable simplices in higher dimensions}
The idea of the Conway spiral may be generalized to bear more fruits. In \cite{Dawson} Dawson, seeking monostatic simplices in higher dimensions, considered the generalized version with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dawson}
\alpha_i = c^{i-1}\alpha _1, \quad i=1,2, \dots n \qquad\mbox{and}\qquad \alpha_{n+1}=\alpha_n
\end{equation}
to which we refer as a \emph{modified Conway spiral}. To describe Dawson's construction we again consider a double spiral, with the mirror images of the vertex $P_i$ defined as $P_{-i}$. In this model the vectors $\mathbf{x}_i=OP_i$, $i=-n, -n+1 \dots n$ are interpreted as the \emph{face vectors} of a simplex ($\mathbf{x}_i$ being orthogonal to the face $f_i$ and having magnitude proportional to the area of $f_i$). To qualify as face vectors, any set of vectors must be balanced \cite{Minkowski}, i.e., we must have 
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sum}
    \sum_{i=-n}^{n}\mathbf{x}_i=0.
\end{equation}
 Dawson  proved that the condition for the simplex tipping from face $f_i$ to $f_j$ can be written as
 \begin{equation}\label{dawson1}
\lvert\mathbf{x}_i\rvert < \lvert\mathbf{x}_j\rvert\cos\theta_{ij},
\end{equation}
where $\theta_{ij}$ is the angle between $\mathbf{x}_i$ and $\mathbf{x}_j$. By using this 
\emph{tipping condition} he found that for $n=5, c=1.5$ the modified Conway spiral (\ref{eq:dawson})  yields a set of balanced vectors, the small
perturbation of which defines a 10-dimensional, homogeneous mono-stable simplex.

\section{Mono-monostatic 0-skeletons}\label{skeletons}
\subsection{The generalized double Conway spiral and planar 0-skeletons}\label{ss:11gon}
If, instead of considering double Conway spirals as homogeneous disks we associate unit masses with the vertices then we obtain objects which may be called \emph{polygonal 0-skeletons}. Since there are relatively many vertices with negative $z$ coordinate and relatively few ones with positive $z$ coordinate, this interpretation appears to be a convenient manner to
add `bottom weight' to the geometric double Conway spiral. In this interpretation as planar 0-skeletons, one may ask whether mono-monostable double Conway spirals exist and if yes, what is the minimal number of their vertices necessary to have this property. Since static balance equations for such a skeleton coincide with (\ref{eq:sum}) and the tipping condition (\ref{dawson1})  is equivalent to prohibit an unstable equilibrium at vertex $v_i$  \cite{Bozoki}, it is easy to see that Dawson's geometric construction, interpreted as a 0-skeleton, 
has $z_C<0$ and it defines a polygon  with $V=11$ vertices which is mono-monostatic. 


One can ask whether this construction is optimal in two ways: whether there exists a smaller value of $n$ which defines a mono-monostatic modified double Conway spiral (interpreted as a 0-skeleton)
and whether by keeping $n=5$, one may pick other values for $\alpha_i$ which
yield a center of mass with larger negative coordinate. The first question was answered in \cite{Dawson3} in the negative by proving that monostable simplices in $d<9$  dimensions do not exist. This implies that for $n<5$ no mono-monostatic Conway spiral (interpreted as a 0-skeleton) exists, but nothing is known  about the existence of mono-monostatic 10-gonal disks as 0-skeletons since they cannot be represented by a symmetric double Conway spiral. The second question may be addressed if we admit \emph{generalized} Conway spirals with arbitrary $\alpha_i$ and optimize this construction to seek the minimum of $z_C$.  

In any case, to verify monostatic property of a given double Conway spiral, $z_C$ needs to be computed. In terms of coordinates $z_i$, we have from Figure~\ref{fig:intro}(a):
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:z_C}
 z_C = \dfrac{1+k \displaystyle\sum_{i=1}^{n} z_i}{1+kn},
\end{equation}
where $k$ stands for the multiplicity of Conway spirals; now $k=2$.
Furthermore, any $z_i$ can be expressed in terms of angles $\angle P_0 O P_i = \sum_{j=1}^i \alpha_j$ and distances $$r_i = \overline{OP_i} = \overline{OP_0}\cdot\prod_{j=1}^i \cos\alpha_j$$ as follows: 
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:z_i}
 z_i = \prod_{j=1}^i \cos\alpha_j\cdot\cos\left(\sum_{j=1}^i \alpha_j\right).
\end{equation}
By merging (\ref{eq:z_C}) and (\ref{eq:z_i}) we get
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:z_prodsum}
 z_C(\boldsymbol{\alpha}) = \dfrac{1+k \displaystyle\sum_{i=1}^{n} \prod_{j=1}^i \cos\alpha_j\cdot\cos\left(\sum_{j=1}^i \alpha_j\right)}{1+kn},
\end{equation}
or briefly,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:z_C_simp}
 z_C(\boldsymbol{\alpha}) = \dfrac{1+k S_n(\boldsymbol{\alpha})}{1+kn}.
\end{equation}
We performed an optimization for $\boldsymbol{\alpha} = (\alpha_1 \ldots \alpha_n)$ and found the shape in Figure~\ref{fig:intro}(b) (see Table~\ref{tb:monomono}, line 6 for computed values of $\boldsymbol{\alpha}$). Note that this single result is an alternative proof for the existence of monostable $10$-dimensional simplices given by Dawson \cite{Dawson}. 

We remark that a similar optimization process of the Conway spiral is discussed in \cite{Minich} for the homogeneous case.

\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{th1}:  Conway $k$-spirals and mono-monostatic 0-skeletons in 3 dimensions}\label{ss:21hedron}


\begin{proof}

Generalized Conway spirals may be used as the building blocks of mono-monostatic 0-skeletons in 3 dimensions. The key idea is to consider instead of a double Conway spiral \emph{multiple} Conway spirals in a $D_k$-symmetrical arrangement around the $z$-axis, rotated at angles $\beta=2\pi/k$. We call such a construction a Conway $k$-spiral. Planar double spirals correspond to $k=2$, while for higher values of $k$ one may seek to find mono-monostatic 0-skeletons. 
If for $k=2$ the Conway spiral defines  a mono-monostatic planar 0-skeleton then we expect that for higher values of $k$ we will obtain mono-monostatic polyhedral 0-skeletons.


The procedure of finding mono-monostatic Conway $k$-spirals (interpreted as 0-skeletons) is as follows:

Let us consider a planar polygonal line $M$ as the intersection of a symmetry plane bisecting a sequence of faces, while another polygonal line $N(Q_0, \ldots,Q_n)$ remains on a sequence of edges as before. 
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{revol.eps}
\caption{Construction of polyhedra with rotational symmetry: side and top views. Polygonal lines $M(P_0, \ldots,P_n)$ (solid line) and $N(Q_0, \ldots,Q_n)$ (dashed line) lie in symmetry planes through faces and edges, respectively. Any optimal construction requires $Q_0Q_1$ instead of $P_0P_1$ to be perpendicular to radius $OQ_1$.}
\label{fig:revol}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Let $e_i$ be an edge $Q_iQ_{i+1}, i=0\ldots n-1$ and face $f_i$ be adjacent to $e_i$. Call face $f_i$ (edge $e_i$) `outwards' if its upper edge (endpoint) is farther from the axis of symmetry than the bottom one, i.e., for a face $f_i$, $\sum_{j=i+2}^{n+1} \alpha_j \leq \pi/2$. Clearly, $e_i$ is outwards if and only if $f_i$ does. 

By construction, $e_0$ and $f_0$ are never outwards but we assume from now on that any $e_i$, $f_i$ with $i>0$ are outwards edges and faces. For them it is clear that $\angle OQ_{i+1}Q_i > \angle OP_{i+1}P_i$ and if this latter equals $\pi/2$, there will be no equilibrium points inside $f_i$. Non-outwards edges, however, are just on the contrary and therefore an optimal construction for the entire polyhedron requires $\angle OQ_{i+1}Q_i = \pi/2$, causing the top vertex $Q_0$ to be moved up by a positive distance $h$ as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:revol}.

It is easy to read from the right triangle $OP_0P_1$ that $z_1 = \cos^2\alpha_1$ and $x_1 = \sin\alpha_1 \cos\alpha_1$. Let the distance between $z$ and $Q_1$ (also between $z$ and $Q'_1$ in the figure) be denoted by $x'_1$. Since $x_1 = x'_1 \cos(\pi/k)$ (see the top view) and $OQ'_1Q_0$ is also a right triangle, for its height of length $x'_1$ the following equality holds:
\begin{equation*}
 \label{eq:height}
 \cos^2\alpha_1 (\sin^2\alpha_1 + h) = \left(\dfrac{\sin\alpha_1 \cos\alpha_1}{\cos(\pi/k)}\right)^2,
\end{equation*}
which yields
\begin{equation*}
 \label{eq:h}
 h = \sin^2\alpha_1 \tan^2\dfrac{\pi}{k}.
\end{equation*}
Since it affects the vertical position of the top vertex and thus of the centroid, (\ref{eq:z_C_simp}) should be modified as 
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:z_C_ast}
 z^\ast_C(\boldsymbol{\alpha}) = \dfrac{1+k S^\ast_n(\boldsymbol{\alpha})}{1+kn},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:S_n_ast}
 S^\ast_n(\boldsymbol{\alpha}) = S_n(\boldsymbol{\alpha}) + \dfrac{1}{k} \sin^2\alpha_1 \tan^2\dfrac{\pi}{k}.
\end{equation}
We performed calculations in search of minimum $z^\ast_C$ that lead to different constructions (denoted as $P_{n,k}
), one
of these constructions with $n=4  , k=5$ is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:intro}(c).

Table~\ref{tb:monomono} summarizes the possible mono-monostatic objects with minimum required $k$ found by the above method ($v = kn+1$ stands for the number of vertices or/and faces):
\begin{table}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|ccclp{7.7cm}|}
 \hline
 no. & $n$ & $k$ & $v$ & $z_C$ & $(\alpha_{n+1},\alpha_n, \ldots, \alpha_1)$
 \\ \hline \hline
 1 & 2 & 25 & 51 & -0.00051277 & $(49.799,   49.799,   80.402)^\circ$ 
 \\ \hline
 2 & 3 & 8 & 25 & -0.0061413 & $(30.273, 30.273, 46.543, 72.912)^\circ$ 
 \\ \hline
 3 & 4 & 5 & 21 & -0.015354 & $(19.716, 19.716, 29.875, 44.519, 66.173)^\circ$ 
 \\ \hline
 4 & 5 & 4 & 21 & -0.029972 & $(13.494, 13.494, 20.336, 29.781, 43.215, 59.680)^\circ$ 
 \\ \hline
 5 & 7 & 3 & 22 & -0.042695 & $( 7.1815, 7.1815, 10.7864, 15.6392, 22.1409,$ $30.9129, 43.0793, 43.0788)^\circ$ 
 \\ \hline
 6 & 5 & 2$^\ast$ & 11 & -0.017984 & $( 13.201, 13.201, 19.890, 29.110, 42.172, 62.427)^\circ$ 
 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\vskip 5mm 
\caption{List of some mono-monostatic 0-skeletons $P_{n,k}$ with $D_k$-symmetry and $v = nk+1$ vertices; $z_C$ can be verified via (\ref{eq:z_prodsum}). $k=2$ marked by `$\ast$' is the two
-dimensional case already mentioned at the end of Subsection~\ref{ss:11gon}. The minimum number of vertices for monostatic 3D rotational polyhedra is 21.}
\label{tb:monomono}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\end{proof}

We believe that this construction  is close to a (local) optimum, i.e., we think that this may be the mono-monostatic 0-skeleton defined by multiple generalized Conway spirals which has the least number of vertices. This, however, does not exclude the existence of mono-monostatic 0-skeletons with smaller number of vertices which have less symmetry. Our construction provides 21 as an \emph{upper bound} for the minimal number of vertices and faces of a mono-monostatic 0-skeleton. The lower bound for the number of vertices was given in \cite{Bozoki} as 8, from which a lower bound of 6 for the number of faces follows \cite{Steinitz1}.

\section{Connection to related other problems}\label{other}
\subsection{Mechanical complexity of polyhedra}
It is apparent that constructing monostatic polyhedra is not easy. In \cite{balancing} this general observation was formalized by introducing the \emph{mechanical complexity} $C(P)$ of a polyhedron $P$ as
\begin{equation}\label{complexity}
 C(P) = 2(V(P) + F(P) - S(P) - U(P)),
\end{equation}
where $V(P),F(P),S(P),U(P)$ stand for the number of vertices, faces, stable and unstable equilibrium points of $P$, respectively.
The \emph{equilibrium class} of polyhedra with given numbers $S,U$ of stable and unstable equilibria is denoted by $(S,U)^E$ and the complexity of such class was defined as
\begin{equation}\label{complexity1}
C(S,U)=min\{C(P): P \in (S,U)^E\}.
\end{equation}
The only material distribution considered in \cite{balancing} was uniform density.
Other types of homogeneous mass distributions, commonly referred to as \emph{h-skeletons} are also possible: 0-skeletons have mass uniformly distributed on their vertices,  1-skeletons have mass uniformly distributed on the edges, 2-skeletons have mass uniformly distributed  on the faces. To distinguish between these
cases we will apply an upper index to the symbol $C$ of complexity, indicating the type of skeleton  (the absence of index indicates classical homogeneity).

In the case of uniform density (classical homogeneity), the complexity for all non-monostatic equilibrium classes $(S,U)^E$ for $S,U>1$ has been computed in \cite{balancing}. On the other hand, the complexity has not yet been determined for any of the monostatic classes $(1,U)^E, (S,1)^E$. Lower and upper bounds exist for $C(S,1),C(1,U)$ for $S,U>1$. The most difficult appears to be the mono-monostatic class $(1,1)^E$ for the complexity $C(1,1)$ of which  the prize USD $1.000.000/C(1,1)$ has been offered in \cite{balancing}. Not only is $C(1,1)$  unknown, at this point there is no upper bound known either.


\subsection{Complexity of some monostable and mono-unstable polyhedral 0-skeletons}\label{ss:complexity}
Admittedly, computing upper bounds for 0-skeletons is easier.
This is already apparent in the planar case, where monostatic discs with homogeneous mass distribution in the interior do not exist \cite{DomokosRuina} whereas a monostatic 0-skeleton could be constructed with $V=11$ vertices  \cite{Dawson}. In 3D,  our construction of a 0-skeleton with $F=21$ faces and $V=21$ vertices (see the top left polyhedron in Figure~\ref{fig:compl} and Table~\ref{tb:monomono}, line 3) offers such an upper bound as
\begin{equation}\label{bound}
C^0(1,1)\leq 2(21+21-1-1) =80
\end{equation}
This is the first known such construction and its existence may help to solve the more difficult cases, in particular,
the case with uniform density. In  Figure~\ref{fig:compl} we provide upper bounds for the complexity of 0-skeletons in some other monostatic equilibrium classes as well.

\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{compl.eps}
\caption{Complexity of some monostable and mono-unstable polyhedra. Drawn representatives of equilibrium classes $(S,U)$ prove an upper bound for complexity of the respective class, see the bracketed numbers as lower and upper bounds, respectively, in the top left corner of their cells. Since mono-unstable polyhedra with less than 8 vertices (and therefore, by Steinitz's theorem, with less than 6 faces) cannot exist, 24 is a lower bound of complexity of classes $(S,1)$. Complexity of the four non-monostatic classes is exactly known by the existence of simplicial representatives of each class \cite{balancing}. Coordinates of drawn polyhedra, except for the one in class (1,1), are given in Table~\ref{tb:coord}. }
\label{fig:compl}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Existence and non-existence of certain types of mono-monostatic 0-skeletons and homogeneous bodies}\label{ss:existence}

The following paragraphs illustrate the relative difficulty of constructing mono-monostatic $h$-skeletons from a different point of view. Firstly, it is known from \cite{DomokosRuina} that no homogeneous mono-monostatic two-dimensional objects rolling along their perimeter exist; however, $P_{5,2}$ drawn in Figure~\ref{fig:intro}b is a mono-monostatic 0-skeleton in 2D. A similar property of non-existence
of homogeneous mono-monostatic objects will be proven below for Conway $k$-spirals, interpreted as homogeneous solids.

\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:nonexst}
Let $P$ be a convex solid with center of mass at $C$. Let $a$ denote an axis intersecting $P$ and let $h(a)$ be a half-plane the boundary of which is $a$. Let $N$ denote the intersection of $P$ and $h(a)$ and let us describe $N$ as the polar distance $r(\varphi)$, measured from $C$ as origin.

If there exists an axis $a$ such that $r(\varphi)$ is strictly monotonic for all possible $h(a)$ then

$P$ is not mono-monostatic.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let an axis $z$ be directed along $a$ and let a point $Q$ on the surface of $P$ be parametrized as $Q(\theta, \varphi,r)$ where $0 \leq\theta\leq \pi$ is the meridian angle between $CQ$ and $z$, $0\leq\varphi< 2\pi$ is the azimuth angle (with respect to a fixed starting position),  $r=\lvert Q-C \rvert$. 
Since $P$ is convex, $r = r(\theta, \varphi)$ for all surface points is uniquely defined. In this polar system, $C$ can only be the centre of mass of $P$ if
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Cheight}
    \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi} \int\limits_{0}^{\pi} \dfrac{2}{9} r(\theta, \varphi)^4 \sin\theta \cos\theta d\theta d\varphi = 0,
\end{equation}
once $(1/3)r^3 \sin\theta d\theta d\varphi$ is the volume of an elementary pyramid with its apex at $C$ and $(2/3)r\cos \theta$ measures the $z$ coordinate for the centre of mass of an elementary pyramid.
From the condition of the theorem, it follows that $r$ is strictly monotonic in $\theta$: assume now that $\theta_1 < \theta_2 \iff r_1 > r_2$ for all $Q_1(\theta_1, \varphi, r_1), Q_2(\theta_2, \varphi, r_2)$ and rewrite (\ref{eq:Cheight}) as follows:
\begin{equation*}
    \dfrac{2}{9} \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi} \int\limits_{0}^{\pi/2} \left(r(\theta, \varphi)^4 \sin\theta \cos\theta + r(\pi-\theta, \varphi)^4 \sin(\pi-\theta) \cos(\pi-\theta) \right) d\theta d\varphi = 0
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation}
    \dfrac{1}{9} \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi} \int\limits_{0}^{\pi/2} \left(r(\theta, \varphi)^4 - r(\pi-\theta, \varphi)^4 \right) \sin 2\theta d\theta d\varphi = 0.
\end{equation}
Here both terms of the product in the integrand are positive, so the definite integral cannot evaluate to zero.
\end{proof}

\begin{cor}
Conway $k$-spirals, interpreted as homogeneous solids, are never mono-monostatic.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
We prove the Corollary by showing that a Conway $k$-spiral satisfies the monotonicity condition of the theorem. Consider $a$ to be aligned with axis $z$ again. Since we consider polyhedral solids, the `level sets' for $r$ are concentric circles on all faces.  By construction, perpendicular projection of $C$ on the base $k$-gon is incident to $a$, so $r$ increases monotonically within that $k$-gon along any $h$. For all other faces, assume that there is a plane $h$ intersecting or being tangent to a level set, but it would immediately imply that a non-horizontal edge (surely contained by some plane $h$) of the same face carries an equilibrium point which contradicts the mono-monostatic property. As a consequence, any $h$ intersects all set levels without being even tangent to any of them, which is a necessary and sufficient condition for $r$ being strictly monotonic along any line $N$ started and ended at the axis $a$.
\end{proof}

We note that Theorem~\ref{thm:nonexst} also implies that any homogeneous smooth solid of revolution cannot be mono-monostatic.


\section{Concluding comments}\label{sum}
In this paper, by relying on the geometric idea of Conway spirals,  we demonstrated the existence of mono-monostatic 0-skeletons in two and three dimensions. In the former case, by drawing on an earlier result of Dawson \cite{Dawson} we showed
that mono-monostatic planar 0-skeletons with $V=11$ vertices exist. It follows from another result of Dawson \cite{Dawson3} that for $V=9$ such constructions can not exist The $V=10$ case is not known.  In three dimensions we showed an explicit construction with $V=21$ vertices,
thus providing an upper bound for the minimal number of vertices. The lower bound is $V=8$ \cite{Bozoki} and other results are not known.
We hope that these constructions will motivate further research to find the minimal number of $V$ for a mono-monostatic 0-skeleton, both in two and in 3 dimensions. 

\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{scriptsize}
    \begin{tabular}{|r|r|r|}
    \hline
    \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{$(S,U) = (1,2)$}\\
    $x$ & $y$ & $z$ \\
    \hline
     0 & 374 & 0 \\
    154 & 80 & 0 \\
    124 & -32 & 0 \\
    81 & -78 & 0 \\
    47 & -95 & 0 \\
    24 & -100 & 0 \\
    -24 & -100 & 0 \\
    -47 & -95 & 0 \\
    -81 & -78 & 0 \\
    -124 & -32 & 0 \\
    -154 & 80 & 0 \\
    0 & -1200 & 5000 \\
    \hline
    \end{tabular}    
    \begin{tabular}{|r|r|r|}
    \hline
    \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{$(S,U) = (1,3)$}\\
    $x$ & $y$ & $z$ \\
    \hline
     0 & 466 & 0 \\
    166 & 70 & 0 \\
    121 & -47 & 0 \\
    71 & -87 & 0 \\
    35 & -100 & 0 \\
    -35 & -100 & 0 \\
    -71 & -87 & 0 \\
    -121 & -47 & 0 \\
    -166 & 70 & 0 \\
    0 & -100 & -900 \\
    0 & -100 & 900 \\
    \hline
    \multicolumn{3}{c}{\phantom{0} }
\end{tabular}
\vskip 5mm
    \begin{tabular}{|r|r|r|}
    \hline
    \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{$(S,U) = (2,1)$}\\
    $x$ & $y$ & $z$ \\
    \hline
    0 & 374.328 & 0 \\
    153.589 & 80.2023 & 20 \\
    124.268 & -32.3675 & 14.9819 \\
    81.1006 & -77.5258 & 8.45141 \\
    46.9121 & -94.4981 & 3.41302 \\
    23.4562 & -100 & 0 \\
    -23.4562 & -100 & 0 \\
    -46.9121 & -94.4981 & 3.41302 \\
    -81.1006 & -77.5258 & 8.45141 \\
    -124.268 & -32.3675 & 14.9819 \\
    -153.589 & 80.2023 & 20 \\
    \hline
    \multicolumn{3}{c}{\phantom{0} }
    \end{tabular}    
    \begin{tabular}{|r|r|r|}
    \hline
    \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{$(S,U) = (3,1)$}\\
    $x$ & $y$ & $z$ \\
    \hline
    0 & 334.907 & 0 \\
    145.019 & 83.7267 & 10 \\
    145.019 & 0 & 9.6018 \\
    94.9161 & -68.9606 & 5.40618 \\
    53.5898 & -92.8203 & 2.10256 \\
    26.7949 & -100 & 0 \\
    -26.7949 & -100 & 0 \\
    -53.5898 & -92.8203 & 2.10256 \\
    -94.9161 & -68.9606 & 5.40618 \\
    -145.019 & 0 & 9.6018 \\
    -145.019 & 83.7267 & 10 \\
    \hline
    \multicolumn{3}{c}{\phantom{0} }
    \end{tabular}    
\end{scriptsize}
\caption{Coordinates of some polyhedra shown in Figure~\ref{fig:compl}. Monostable objects are provided with integer coordinates which would be difficult for mono-unstable ones due to oblique polygonal faces.}
\label{tb:coord}
\end{center}
\end{table}




2021-10-14T02:23:03.000
2103
2103.13727
en
https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.13727
We show an explicit construction in 3 dimensions for a convex, mono-monostatic polyhedron (i.e., having exactly one stable and one unstable equilibrium) with 21 vertices and 21 faces. This polyhedron is a 0-skeleton, with equal masses located at each vertex. The above construction serves as an upper bound for the minimal number of faces and vertices of mono-monostatic 0-skeletons and complements the recently provided lower bound of 8 vertices. This is the first known construction of a mono-monostatic polyhedral solid. We also show that a similar construction for homogeneous distribution of mass cannot result in a mono-monostatic solid.
Metric Geometry (math.MG); Combinatorics (math.CO)
Conway's spiral and a discrete Gömböc with 21 point masses
Qwen/Qwen-72B
1. YES
2. YES