Jim Choate wrote: > Draw a picture. If you don't have a place to post it I can arrange a page > gratis. > > You take three nodes. > > Arrange them in a ring/triangle. Each node branches to 295(?) other nodes > (making it a member of three 100 node subnets - somehow these numbers > don't add up). It's not clear if those are a 'one to many' branch or if > that node simply has two links to two other nodes in the ring (which has a > total of 100 nodes). And where did the '2 other triangles' come from? We > start with a single triange that is a member of a larger set the nodes of > which are the members of a -two triangle- set? Why is 'our' triangle > 'single'? > > Is this a 'big version' of the 'Caveman World'? > >
The evil triangles have been banished for now. I played with graphviz for a while last night and it's easy enough to see that this is a torus. I'm not clear if George meant a 100x100x100 or 3x100x100 lattice, but either way it's easy to see it as a wrapped cubical structure. The fact that all nodes have the same number of connections should have been my tip-off. That's not to say that there isn't a way to do this with triangles, or maybe tetrahedra. I couldn't see an easy way to do it, though. It does seem unlikely with those numbers. Ignore the 2 other triangles stuff, I was groping at something else. In future I will try to avoid thinking out loud like that. Not familiar with the "Caveman World" reference. jbdigriz
