After watching Vi Hart‘s latest video I found myself thinking about patterns, because I’m the weird sort of number theorist who’s more interested in general structures than specific instances like actual numbers. Because I’m doubly weird, I tend to doodle with computer code rather than pen and paper, so over the christmas break I cobbled together a toy to explore some colourings of Pascal’s Triangle:
The default is as Vi illustrated, where each dot has one of three colours. At no point do I bother to calculate values in Pascal’s triangle to work out a colour: instead, I implemented the ‘group law’ – the rule that combines pairs of dots into a new dot – and used that to find each new dot based on its parents above it. This underlying group structure is the same as Vi’s drawing, except the colours are different: you could write down a rule for changing my colours into hers and applying it consistently would recover her sketch. That probably doesn’t seem too surprising: what’s more remarkable is that any group of three elements is, in the most abstract sense, the same as these: which is why the original approach, of taking remainders modulo 3, also corresponds perfectly to manipulating coloured dots directly instead of numbers.
There’s nothing special about having three colours, so I’ve included the option to have anything from two to eight: no reason to stop there, except I was struggling to come up with non-garish palettes! These are all examples of cyclic groups: if you keep applying the group law you cycle through each colour before coming back to the first one and repeating. But not all groups are cyclic, so I wondered what would happen if I picked a group that wasn’t. For instance, with four colours you can write down two equally valid yet inequivalent group laws: the cycle on four colours, or the Klein four-group1 which combines two copies of the cycle on two elements. But when I tried to plot that, I just got a two-coloured diagram, not four: I was trapped in the smaller subgroup. Similarly, you can make a group of six elements by considering symmetries of an equilateral triangle: from that I could recover either the two or three colour plots.
In fact, this limitation will always apply when the triangle is grown from a single seed, and all the surrounding dots are assumed to be the ‘zero’ or identity colour. Each seed will generate a cycle of some length, and the picture you get will only include colours from that cycle, not the entire palette: except for the happy cases where you picked a cyclic group and a generator as the seed2. I tried lopping off the top dot, so that the ‘triangle’ could be grown from the interaction of two elements, but the results tended to be ugly: you lose symmetry, which is always a disappointment when playing with groups!
1 Which uncoincidentally happens to be the name of this group of mathemusicians!
2 Exercise for undergrads: prove this








