It is known that there are 8 alternating labyrinths with 1 arm and 5 circuits (see “Considering Meanders and Labyrinths”, related posts, below). Of these, four are not self-dual. These four all are in a relationship to each other via the duality and complementarity (see “The Complementary versus the Dual Labyrinth”, related posts, below). The other four labyrinths are self-dual.

I had already pointed to the relationship between complementary and self-dual labyrinths (see “The Complementary Labyrinth”, related posts, below). Here I want to elaborate on it further. For this purpose I use the same form of diagram I had already used in my previous post (see “The Complementary versus the Dual Labyrinth”). I also use the same numbers of the labyrinths according to the numbering of Arnol’d’s meanders (see “Considering Meanders and Labyrinths”), that underlie them.

The first of the Arnol’d’s labyrinths, number 1, is self-dual. In the diagram, the dual is situated in the same row, the complementary in the same column with the original labyrinth. The dual of number 1 is again number 1 (what actually is the meaning of selfdual). The complementary of number 1 is number 6. And – of course – is the dual to the complementary again number 6. So in the case of self-dual labyrinths, we only captured two different labyrinths, whereas it were four in the case of not self-dual labyrinths.

Thus, two more labyrinths are still missing. We need another diagram to capture labyrinths number 3 and number 8 (fig. 2).

And, indeed, these two are complementary to each other. So in self-dual labyrinths, only two different labyrinths are in a relationship to each other.

Here the question arises: Do there also exist self-complementary labyrinths? Up to now we have not yet found such a labyrinth. So let us remember, what self-dual imples. The patterns of the original and self-dual labyrinths are self-covering. In fig. 3 I show what that means. The two patterns in the same row are dual. If we shift them together, we can easily see, what I mean.

Thus, self-complementary would imply that the original and complementary pattern would also be self-covering.

Fig. 4 shows, that even though there is a certain similarity between these two patterns, they are not self-covering. In my opinion there are no self-complementary labyrinths. This is because vertical mirroring with uninterrupted connections to the entrance and center modifies the sequence of circuits. This, however, woult have to remain unaltered.

**Related Posts:**

To be self-complementary, the labyrinth’s entrance and exit must connect to the middle course, and that course can connect neither up nor down in the interior. Therefore, the only such labyrinth is the 1-course (1-circuit) labyrinth with no interior axes.

LikeLike

Yes, that’s true. But I wouldn’t consider such a figure to be a labyrinth.

LikeLike

I agree, it’s not very interesting to walk! But it fits any reasonable definition, and mathematically shows up a lot.

LikeLike

Pingback: The Complementaries of the Three Very Interesting Historical Labyrinths with 4 Arms and 11 Circuits | blogmymaze