See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/227190659

Sides of the Möbius Strip

Article  in  Archiv der Mathematik · June 1996

DOI: 10.1007/BF01268871

CITATIONS READS
35 248

2 authors:

Thomas Randrup Peter Røgen

Configit Technical University of Denmark
8 PUBLICATIONS   279 CITATIONS    29 PUBLICATIONS   487 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Configuration lifecycle management (CLM) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Peter Røgen on 14 March 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Sides of the Mobius Strip
Thomas Randrup and Peter Rgen
June, 1995

Abstract
We present the necessary and sucient conditions for a curve to be
the center curve of an analytic and at embedding of the Mobius strip (or
an orientable cylinder) into euclidean 3-space. Using these conditions we
extend an example by G. Schwarz into a continuous family of analytic and
at Mobius strips. This family is split into two connected components.
We give a topological argument that explains this behaviour.

1 Introduction
The works [5] and [6] of G. Schwarz focus on at and analytic embeddings of the
Mobius strip into euclidean 3-space. The article [6] presents an analytic, alge-
braic, and at embedding of the Mobius strip into euclidean 3-space. Through
an analysis of his construction we have found necessary and sucient condi-
tions for a curve to be the center curve of an analytic and at embedding of the
Mobius strip (or the orientable cylinder) into euclidean 3-space. By a Mobius
strip respectively an orientable cylinder we mean a geometric object obtained
as follows: Take a strip of paper and \twist" it, tie a knot on it, and glue its
ends together. From the necessary and sucient conditions we can provide a
continuous family of analytic and at Mobius strips given by trigonometric poly-
nomials. Furthermore, we will give a topological argument using the \twist" of
Mobius strips explaining why such families never are connected. Finally, we will
point out how the work [1] of C. Chicone and N.J. Kalton on at and analytic
Mobius strips is connected to the construction we consider below.

2 Necessary and Sucient Conditions

In the following we will consider isometric embeddings of the Mobius strip
into euclidean 3-space. Consequently, all geodesic curves on an embedding are
straight lines on an unfolding of the embedding. Consider a rectangular unfold-
ing of a Mobius strip. On this unfolding there are two types of closed straight
lines, namely, those which close after two traversions and exactly one which
closes after one traversion. We will call this unique shortest closed geodesic
curve on a at Mobius strip the center curve of the strip.

1
2 Thomas Randrup and Peter Rgen

Let the Frenet frame (t; n; b) along a curve r : I ! R3 with r0  r00 6= 0

satisfy the cross product relations
t = n  b; n = b  t; and b = t  n
and the Frenet formulas
t0 = n
n0 = ?t +  b
b0 = ? n
where  > 0 is the curvature and  is the torsion of r. This determines the sign
of the torsion1 .
Given a curve with non-vanishing curvature there exists one unique at ruled
surface on which this curve is a geodesic curve. This at surface is the so called
rectifying developable. For reference see [3], p. 71. A short calculation shows
that given a curve r : I ! R3 satisfying r0  r00 6= 0 its rectifying developable is
given by
r~(s; t) = r(s) + t( t + b); s 2 I; t 2 R:
If the interval I is compact there exists an  > 0 such that the restriction
r~jI]?";"[ is an embedding. If one instead chooses the ruling  t+b the parameter
t is the geodesic distance to the center curve.
The rectifying developable has the same normal vector as the principal nor-
mal vector of the center curve along the center curve. If the center curve has
non-vanishing curvature it has a Frenet frame in every point. So, the rectifying
developable will be an orientable surface.
To obtain a smooth surface it is only necessary to have a projectively well-
dened normal vector eld. This leads to
Denition 1 Let r : I ! R3 be a regular curve and let t0 2 I . Assume the
limits n (t0) = limt!t0 n(t) exist.
 If n?(t0 ) = n+ (t0), then r(t0 ) will be called a frame preserving point.
 If n?(t0 ) = ?n+ (t0 ), then r(t0) will be called a frame switching point.
Points with non-vanishing curvature are frame preserving. But a point with
vanishing curvature can be a frame preserving point, frame switching point, or
a point where the principal normal cannot be projectively well-dened.
In order to obtain a Mobius strip it is necessary that its center curve has
an odd number of frame switching points and the rest frame preserving. To
describe frame preserving and switching points we give
Theorem 2 Let r : I ! R3 be a C n-parametrization of a regular curve, n  2,
so that the points with zero curvature are isolated. Set J = (r0  r00 )?1 (0). If
for t0 2 J the natural number (the order of the zero for the curvature)
( X j (i+1) (j ?i+2)
)
 r (t 0)  r (t0)
j n?2  i=0
N(t0 ) = 0min j i!(j ? i)! 6= 0
1 In [1] they use the opposite sign on the torsion.
Sides of the Mobius Strip 3

exists, then r(t0) is a frame preserving point if N(t0 ) is even and r(t0) is a
frame switching point if N(t0 ) is odd.

Proof: Let r : I ! R be as in the theorem. We may assume that t = 0. So,

3
0
r0  r00 (0) = 0 and r0  r00(t) 6= 0 in a punctured neighbourhood of zero. If the
parametrization is C n it has the Taylor series
X
n ri (0)
r(t) = i! t + o(t )
i n
i=0
and the jth derivative has the Taylor series
nX
?j ri+j (0)
r j (t) = n?j
i! t + o(t ):
( ) i
i=0
Cauchy multiplication gives
nX
?2 X
j i !
r0  r00 (t) = r (0)  r j?i (0) ti + o(tn? ):
( +1) ( +2)
2

j =0 i=0 i!(j ? i)!

From the cross product relation n = b  t it0 follows
00
that n+ (0) = n?(0)
+ ? r 
are equivalent to b (0) = b (0). As b = jr0r00 j it follows that the leading
r
term in the Taylor series of r0  r00 gives the sign in the right hand side of
b+ (0) = b?(0). Denoting the order of the leading term in the Taylor series
of r0  r00 by N(0), i.e.,
( X j i j ?i (0)
)
N(0) = min j 2 f0; 1; : : :; n ? 2g  r (0)  r ( +1)
6= 0
( +2)

i i!(j ? i)!
=0

we have b+ (0) = (?1)N (0) b? (0) if N(0) exists. Hence,

n (0) = (?1)N n?(0):
+ (0)


Conditions for pieces of rectifying developables to t together in frame pre-
serving and switching points are given in
Theorem 3 Let r : I ! R be a C n-parametrization of a regular curve, n  3,
3

so that the points with zero curvature are isolated. Set J = (r0  r00 )? (0). If 1

for every t 2 J the natural numbers

0

( X j i j ?i (t )
)
N(t ) = min 
j  r (t )  r ( +1)
6 0
= 0
( +2)
0
0
j n?
0
i 2 i!(j ? i)!
=0
4 Thomas Randrup and Peter Rgen

and M(t0 ) =
8  k ! 9
< X 1 X j i
r (t )  r j ?i (t ) =
min k  ( +1)
0

r
( +2)
k?j (t ) 6= 0 0 ( +3)
0 kn? : j (k ? j)! i
3
=0
i!(j ? i)!
=0
; 0

exist, then the rectifying developable of r exists if and only if for every t0 2 J
the inequality M(t0 )  3N(t0) is fullled.
If the parametrization r : I ! R3 is C 1 then M = +1 is allowed.
Remark 4 Observe that N is the order of the zero for the curvature and that
M is the order of the zero for the torsion multiplied by the squared curvature.
Hence, the inequality M(t0)  3N(t0 ) expresses geometrically that the order of
the zero for the torsion has to be bigger than or equal to the order of the zero
for the curvature.

Proof: On a ruled surface the rulings only have to be projectively well-dened.
We will now analyse the situation where the ruled surface is the rectifying
developable of a regular C n-curve which has an isolated zero for its curvature.
We may assume that this happens for t = 0. For t 6= 0 we have
q = pb +  t
jqj 2 +  2
r0 r00 [r0 r00 r000 ] r0
r0j3 jr0 r00 j + jr0 r00 j3 jr0j
1

= qj :
[r0 r00 r000 ]2
1
0
jr j 6 + 0
jr r j 00 6

As r0 6= 0 the rulings q are projectively well-dened if

lim r0  r00 =  lim r0  r00 ) lim [r0r00 r000] =  lim [r0r00 r000 ] :
t!0+ jr0  r00j t!0? jr0  r00j t!0+ jr0  r00 j3 t!0? jr0  r00 j3
Suppose that N(0) exists, then 3N(0) is the order of the leading term in jr0r00 j3.
Let M(0) be the order of the leading term in
nX
0k ! 1
@X 1 X
?3 j i
r (0)  r j
( +1)? i (0)
r k?j (0)A tk
( +2)
[r0r00 r000](t) = (k ? j)! i i!(j ? i)!
( +3)

k=0 j =0 =0

+ o(tn?3):
0 00 000
Then the limits for [jrr0rrr00 j3] exist if and only if M(0)  3N(0). If M(0) = 3N(0)
0 00 000
the signs in the above implications are correct else limt!0 [jrr0rrr00 j3] = 0, whereby,
the implications trivially are fullled. 
In connection to the above proof note that, if we cut a Mobius strip along
the ruling through r(t0) and unfold it, then the unfolding of the ruled surface
Sides of the Mobius Strip 5
0 00 000
will be a rectangle exactly when limt!t0 [jrr0rrr00 j3] = 0, i.e., M(t0 ) > 3N(t0 ), else
this unfolding is a trapezium.
If jqqj are the rulings before a frame switching point, r(t0 ), it is necessary to
change to ? jqqj as rulings after this frame switching point2. This procedure en-
sures that the rectifying
 developable of an analytic curve is analytic because the
q t?t N (t0 )
ruling jqj is jt?t00j times an analytic vector eld. Note, that analyticity
of a non-straight curve ensures that the points with zero curvature lie discrete
on the curve, whereby, Theorem 3 applies.
The next theorem classies the closed curves described in Theorem 3.
Theorem 5 Let the conditions in Theorem 3 be fullled by a closed curve with
no self intersections. If the number of frame switching points
 is even, then the rectifying developable is an orientable, at surface.
 is odd, then the rectifying developable contains a at Mobius strip.
If the parametrization is analytic these conditions are both necessary and suf-
cient for the curve to be the center curve of a at and analytic Mobius strip
respectively an orientable, at, and analytic surface.

Proof: Let r be a curve that fullls the conditions in Theorem 3. In a frame
switching point the rulings have opposite limits if and only if the integers N
and M fulll the conditions in Theorem 3. So, if the number of frame switch-
ing points is even respectively odd the rectifying developable is an orientable
respectively unorientable, at surface.
Consider an analytic closed curve. As already noticed, this curve only has
isolated zeros for its curvature. These zeros are of nite order since else the
curve has constant zero curvature. Thus, the integer N exists in each of the
isolated zeros for the curvature.
If an analytic curve has M = +1, then [r0r00 r000 ] is identical equal to zero.
Hence, the curve lies in a plane, and will, therefore, carry an orientable, at
surface. Consider the curve as a curve in the plane. In a frame switching point
the curvature of the plane curve changes sign. Since the curvature of the plane
curve is periodic, the number of frame switching points is even.
By these arguments we can conclude that the conditions in Theorem 5 are
both necessary and sucient for an analytic curve to be the center curve of a
at and analytic Mobius strip or of an orientable, at, and analytic surface. 

Remark 6 It is noteworthy, that as well atness of surfaces as the constants

N and M from Theorem 3 are preserved under ane transformations. Thus,
we are only interested in nding center curves of Mobius strips modulo ane
transformations.
2 On a M
obius strip this gives a two fold covering.
6 Thomas Randrup and Peter Rgen

Throughout we will consider at least three times continuous dierentiable

parametrizations r : I ! R3 of regular closed curves. Hence, they all have
Fourier expansions. Given a parametrization, r : I ! R3, of a regular closed
curve we say that it is of degree n (+1 is allowed) if the Fourier expansion of
r is of the form r(t) = a0 + Pnm=1 (am cos mt + bm sin mt). By the degree of a
closed curve we mean the minimum of the degrees of its parametrizations where
again +1 is allowed.
Theorem 7 Given the center curve, , of a Mobius strip. Let p be a projection
of into a plane, p. And let l be a projection of into a line, l. Then
deg( )  3, deg( p )  2, and deg( l )  1.

Proof: It is not possible for a curve, , parametrized by a trigonometric poly-

nomial of degree 2 to be the center curve of a at Mobius strip. This is veried
by using Theorem 5. Since, after some calculation we nd that already the
demands N(0)  1 and M(0)  3 force the curve to lie in a plane, whereby, its
rectifying developable is orientable. Hence, deg( )  3.
Let p be a projection of into a plane, p. If the degree of p is one, then
p is an ellipse. Hence, p and, thereby, also has non-vanishing curvature.
Therefore, carries an orientable surface.
Let l be a projection of into a line, l. If deg( l ) = 0 then l is a point,
i.e., lies in a plane, whereby, its rectifying developable is orientable. 

3 A Family of Mobius Strips

We will illustrate how Theorem 5 can be used to nd center curves for at and
analytic Mobius strips. We want to nd degree 3 curves which each has a degree
2 plane projection and a degree 1 line projection. It is, according to Theorem
7, necessary that the line, l, is contained in the plane, p. Hence, there exists a
coordinate system (x; y; z) such that l is the x-axis and p is the xy-plane.
According to Theorem 5 there has to be at least one point on the curve r
with zero curvature. Consider the projection, rxy , of the space curve r into the
xy-plane. If r has zero curvature in a point, then rxy has zero curvature in the
projection of this point. We can assume that there is zero curvature for t = 0,
and that rxy (0) = (0; 0), r0xy (0) = (1; 0), and r00xy (0) = (?; 0). Solving these
equations we have the expression
    
rxy (t) = a (1 ? cos t) + sin t; b 1 ? 34 cos t + 31 cos 2t + c sin t ? 12 sin 2t :
The only ane transformation left over is that the y-coordinate can be scaled.
So, we might choose b2 + c2 = 1. By construction we now have found all degree
1,2 projections of center curves of at and analytic Mobius strips up to ane
transformation.
Sides of the Mobius Strip 7

To simplify calculations and to include G. Schwarz's example we take a =

0, b = 0, and c = 1. As the third coordinate of the curve r we choose a
trigonometric polynomial of degree 3. So, we consider the following family of
curves:
r(t) = (sin t; sin t(1 ? cos t); z(t))
where z is a trigonometric polynomial of degree 3, i.e.,
X3

z(t) = a0 + (am cos (mt) + bm sin (mt)) for t 2 [0; 2[:

m=1
Theorem 8 A curve r from the above family of curves with zero curvature for
t = 0 is the center curve of a at and analytic Mobius strip if and only if
r(t) = (sin t; sin t(1 ? cos t); z(t))
with
5 5 1

z(t) = a 3 ? 2 cos t + cos 2t ? 6 cos 3t + b sint + b sin2t + b sin 3t
2 1 2 3

where a2 2 Rnf0g and b1 ; b2; b3 2 R.

All other center curves of at and analytic Mobius strips from the above
family of curves are ane transformations of those with zero curvature for t = 0.

Proof: The projection, rxy, into the xy-plane has only zero curvature for t
equal to zero or . This means that the curvature of the space curve r only can
be zero for t equal to zero or . Since,
X r i (0)  r
1 ( +1) (1 ?i+2)(0)
i!(1 ? i)! = r0(0)  r000 (0) + r00(0)  r00 (0)
i=0
= r0(0)  r000 (0)
= (1; 0; b1 + 2b2 + 3b3)  (?1; 3; ?b1 ? 8b2 ? 27b3)
= (?; ?; 3) 6= 0
and
X r i ()  r
1 ( +1) (1?i+2)()
i!(1 ? i)! = r0(0)  r000 (0)
i=0
= (?1; ?2; ?b1 + 2b2 ? 3b3)  (1; 5; b1 ? 8b2 + 27b3)
= (?; ?; ?3) 6= 0
it is only possible for N to equal zero and one in r(0) and in r() (cf. Theorem
3). According to Theorem 5 we can only obtain Mobius strips if (N(0); N())
8 Thomas Randrup and Peter Rgen

equals (1; 0) or (0; 1). The two cases (0; 0) and (1; 1) give orientable surfaces.
We will start with the case (N(0); N()) = (1; 0). Now, N() = 0 requires
r0  r00 () = (?2z 00(); z 00(); 0) 6= 0 , z 00 () = a1 ? 4a2 + 9a3 6= 0: (1)
In order to use Theorem 5 we need to know the rst four derivatives of r for
t = 0.
r0 = (1; 0; z 0(0)) = (1; 0; b1 + 2b2 + 3b3 )
r00 = (0; 0; z 00 (0)) = (0; 0; ?a1 ? 4a2 ? 9a3 )
r000 = (?1; 3; z 000 (0)) = (?1; 3; ?b1 ? 8b2 ? 27b3)
r(4) = (0; 0; z (4)(0)) = (0; 0; a1 + 16a2 + 81a3)
For N(0) to be greater than or equal to one there has to be zero curvature
for t = 0. Hence,
r0  r00 = (0; ?z 00 (0); 0) = 0 , z 00(0) = a1 + 4a2 + 9a3 = 0: (2)
The statements (1) and (2) imply
a2 6= 0 ^ a1 + 4a2 + 9a3 = 0: (3)
Note, that (2) is equivalent to the statement r00 (0) = 0. Requiring N(0) to be
equal to one demands that M(0) is bigger than two (cf. Theorem 3). This gives
the following constrains for t = 0.
M(0) 6= 1:
X Xj (i+1) (j ?i+2) !
1
1 r r
r(1?j +3)
j =0 (1 ? j)! i=0 i!(j ? i)!
= [r r r ] + [r0r000r000 ] + [r00 r00r000 ]
0 00 (4)

= 0:
M(0) 6= 2:
X 1 X j i !
2
r  r j?i
( +1)

r
( +2)
(2?j +3)
j =0 (2 ? j)! i =0
i!(j ? i)!
= 12 [r0r00 r(5)] + [r0r000 r(4)] + [r00 r00r(4) ] + 21 [r0r(4)r000] + [r00 r000r000 ] + 12 [r000 r00 r000 ]
= 21 [r0r000r(4) ]
 1 ?1 0 

1 
= 2  0 3 0 =0
 z0(0) z000(0) z(4)(0) 
, z (4) (0) = a1 + 16a2 + 81a3 = 0: (4)
Combining the statements (3) and (4) we have the family of center curves given
in the theorem.
Sides of the Mobius Strip 9

The solutions for (N(0); N()) = (0; 1) are the same as those we already
have found. This can easily be seen as follows. First, change the parameter t
to u +  leading to
 
rxy (u + ) = ? sin u; ? sinu ? 21 sin 2u :
Let
 ?1 0the. Then
xy-plane undergo the linear transformation described by the matrix
?2 1 we obtain
 
~rxy (u) = sin u; sinu ? 12 sin 2u :
Using the parameter u we now have to nd the solutions fullling (N(0); N()) =
(1; 0), which we already have found. 
The rst curve which is considered in the article [6] is the curve of degree 2
given by
r1(t) = (sin t; sint(1 ? cos t); (1 ? cos t)2)
0   0    0 
= 30=2 + ?002 cos t + 1=02 cos 2t + 110 sint + ?10=2 sin2t:
G. Schwarz concludes that this curve cannot produce a Mobius strip since for
t = 0 the rectifying developable is singular. But as the degree of the curve r1
is 2 it follows immediately from Theorem 7 that r1 cannot produce a Mobius
strip.
The way that G. Schwarz succeeds in nding a at, analytic, and algebraic
Mobius strip is by raising the degree of the third coordinate. He proves in [6]
that the curve
r2(t) = (sin t; sint(1 ? cos t); (1 ? cos t)3)
is the center curve of a at, analytic, and algebraic Mobius strip. We observe
that the curve found by G. Schwarz is the one from Theorem 8 with a2 = 23 and
b1 = b2 = b3 = 0, since
3
5 5 1

z(t) = (1 ? cos t) = 2 3 ? 2 cos t + cos 2t ? 6 cos 3t :
3

4 Disconnectedness of the Family

We will now give a topological argument that explains why any family of center
curves of Mobius strips obtained as in Section 3 cannot be connected. Given
an embedding of the Mobius strip into euclidean 3-space we will now focus on
its center curve and its boundary curve. The linking number (see e.g. [2], pp.
79-80) between the center curve and the boundary curve of an embedding of
the Mobius strip gives a natural invariant for embeddings of the Mobius strip.
We shall now describe this invariant.
10 Thomas Randrup and Peter Rgen

The linking number between two oriented curves is invariant under shift
of the orientation of both curves. Hence, orienting both the center curve and
the boundary curve, from a choice of a direction in which the embedding is
traversed, makes the linking number between the center curve and the boundary
curve well-dened as an invariant attached to embeddings of the Mobius strip.
This invariant will always equal an odd integer (and it equals twice the intuitive
twisting number of each embedding). See [4] for related work where we use the
twisting number and the knot described by the center curve to classify the class
of closed strips in euclidean 3-space.
A re ection of euclidean 3-space in a plane changes the orientation of eu-
clidean 3-space. Hence, this invariant for embeddings of the Mobius strip
changes sign if the embeddings are re ected in a plane. So, since this invariant
does not equal zero an embedding can never lie in the same connected compo-
nent of a family of embeddings as its mirror image.
Finally, a change of sign on the parameter space in our family of center
curves of Mobius strips corresponds exactly to a re ection in the plane given
by z = 0 (cf. Theorem 8). This is a topological explanation why the parameter
space in our family of center curves of Mobius strips has to be disconnected.

5 Another Mobius Strip Construction

We will point out how the work of C. Chicone and N.J. Kalton in [1] on at
and analytic Mobius strips is connected to the construction of at and analytic
Mobius strips presented above. The main concern in [1] is with axes of ruled
developable surfaces with the property that they are orthogonal to the rulings.
The following theorem and remark describe these orthogonal axes.
Theorem 9 On a ruled surface containing a Mobius strip whose center curve,
r : [0; T[! R , only has one point with zero curvature there exists one unique
3

curve, y, orthogonal to the rulings, q, which closes after one traversion. The
curve y : [0; T[! R is given by
3

y(s) = r(s) + f(s) jqqj

where s is the arc length of the curve r, (0) = 0, and
ZT Zs !
f(s) = 21 p 2 2 du ? p 2 2 du :
s  + 0  +
All other curves which are orthogonal to the rulings closes after two traversions.

Proof: Since q never is parallel to the tangent of the center curve, a curve
orthogonal to the rulings of a ruled surface can be written on the form
y(s) = r(s) + f(s) jqqj :
Sides of the Mobius Strip 11

Choosing a normalized ruling q = pt+2 +b2 , we obtain y(s) = r(s) + f(s)q. The
orthogonality of y and the ruling gives
0 = y0
q = t
q + f 0 (s):
Hence, Zs
f(s) = ? p 2 du + f(0):
0 + 2
Since the curve might not close after one traversion of the ruled surface we put
indices on the maps according to the number of traversions. The curve y is con-
tinuous (which automatically, by orthogonality, ensures that y is continuously
dierentiable) if
fi (0) = ?fi?1 (T); i 2 Z:
Hence, the curve y closes after, at most, two traversions of the ruled surface. As
with the closed geodesic curves on a Mobius strip (cf. page 1) there is exactly
one of these orthogonal curves which closes after one traversion of the ruled
surface. For y to close after one traversion it is necessary and sucient that
f(T) = ?f(0), i.e.,
ZT
f(T) = ? p 2 du + f(0) = ?f(0)
0  + 2
The following calculation completes the proof.
Zs 1 Z T p  du
f(s) = ? p 2 du + 2 0  2 + 2 !
 + 2
1 Z
0
T  Zs 
=2 p 2 2 du ? p 2 2 du :
s  + 0  +


Remark 10 It is obvious, that the description of the orthogonal axes in The-

orem 9 also apply if the center curve has more than one isolated zero for its
curvature fullling Theorem 5. But then the function f in Theorem 9 has to
be discontinuous, whenever, the integer N from Theorem 3 is odd, leading to a
more complicated formula for the function f .
Again, since an analytic center curve of a Mobius strip has isolated zeros
for its curvature, we conclude that the total ruled developable of this analytic
center curve contains one curve orthogonal to the rulings which closes after one
traversion. Henceforward, we shall refer to this curve as the orthogonal curve.
All other curves which are orthogonal to the rulings closes after two traversions.
This orthogonal curve is closely connected with at and analytic Mobius
strips through the following theorem by C. Chicone and N.J. Kalton [1].
12 Thomas Randrup and Peter Rgen

Theorem 11 (C. Chicone and N.J. Kalton) Let ra : R ! R be a closed 3

smooth (respectively analytic) curve in R with non-vanishing curvature. Then

3

ra is an axis of a ruled developable Mobius strip with smooth (respectively ana-

lytic) rulings everywhere orthogonal to ra if and only if the total torsion of ra
is an odd multiple of .
As mentioned in Section 4, the linking number between the center curve and
the boundary curve of an embedding of the Mobius strip is an invariant attached
to the embedding. Since this linking number equals an odd integer and since
the total torsion of the orthogonal curve divided by  is an odd integer; we are
lead to ask if there is a connection between the total torsion of the orthogonal
curve and the linking number between the center curve and the boundary curve.
Actually, a curve satisfying Theorem 11 is an axis not only of one ruled
developable Mobius strip, but of a family of ruled developable Mobius strips.
Let ra be an axis as described in Theorem 11 parametrized by arc length, s,
then for all k 2 R the rulings
 Zs   Zs 
rr (s) = cos ? du + k n + sin ? du + k b
0 0

along ra gives at ruled non-orientable surfaces.

There are two problems with the construction used by C. Chicone and N.J.
Kalton. One problem is that the orthogonal curve of a at analytic Mobius
strip might have isolated zeros for its curvature. This problem can, however, be
treated as we have treated the analogous problem for center curves of at and
analytic Mobius strips. The other problem is that the unique center curve of
the ruled surface might have self-intersections, whereby, the ruled surface will
not contain an embedding of the Mobius strip isomorphic to a rectangle. In
other words, their construction does not give control of the unfolding. In this
connection one has to be aware of the fact that it is hard to nd (i.e. solve the
geodesic equation) the center curve from the orthogonal curve.

Acknowledgments
It is our pleasure to thank J. Gravesen and S. Markvorsen for suggesting the
problems and for fruitful discussions during our work and writing.
 Sides of the Mobius Strip 13

References
[1] Chicone C. & Kalton N.J., Flat Embeddings of the Mobius Strip in R3,
Preprint, Department of Mathematics, University of Missouri, Columbia,
(1984).
[2] Flanders H., Dierential Forms, Mathematics in Science and Engineering,
Academic Press, New York, (1963).
[3] Graustein W.C., Dierential Geometry, Dover Publications, Inc., New
York, (1966).
[4] Randrup T. & Rgen P., How to Twist a Knot, Master of Science Thesis,
Mathematical Institute, Technical University of Denmark, (January 1995).
[5] Schwarz G., The Dark Side of the Moebius Strip, Amer. Math. Monthly,
Vol. 97, No. II, (1990), pp. 890-897.
[6] Schwarz G., A pretender to the title \Canonical Moebius Strip", Pacic J.
Math., Vol. 143, No. 1, (1990), pp. 195-200.

Thomas Randrup and Peter Rgen

Mathematical Institute
Technical University of Denmark
Building 303
DK-2800 Lyngby
Denmark
E-mail addresses:
Thomas.Randrup@mat.dtu.dk
Peter.Roegen@mat.dtu.dk

View publication stats