If a subset of the square grid can be tiled by $1\times n$ rectangles for every $n$, can it be tiled by infinite rays?

Suppose that we have some set $S$ of grid-aligned squares in the plane; equivalently, we can think of our set as $S\subset \mathbb{Z}^2$. Suppose that for every positive integer $n$, $S$ can be tiled by disjoint copies of a $1\times n$ rectangle (possibly rotated). Is it necessarily the case that $S$ can be tiled by congruent copies of an infinite "ray" of squares, i.e., a region congruent to the set $\{(k,0)\ |\ k\ge0\}$?

For example, the region given by removing from $\mathbb{Z}^2$ the points $(0,0), (1,1)$, and $(-1,2)$ can be tiled by every $1\times n$ rectangle, and also by infinite rays, as shown:

enter image description here

I'd like to say that this follows from some kind of compactness argument, but my attempts to apply such reasoning ran into trouble (I can't rule out that the $1\times n$ tilings have their endpoints move away from the origin without a well-defined limiting behavior). Any thoughts on how to prove this (or a counterexample, if my intuition is badly wrong)?

I believe the same statement should hold in $\mathbb{Z}^n$ with $1\times1\times\ldots\times1\times n$ tiles and the same kind of rays; if the original statement proves easy to show, I would be interested in this generalization.

As a remark, the converse is obviously true, since the infinite ray can be tiled by any $1\times n$ rectangle.


Apologies in advance for shooting sparrows with cannons, but I can't give away such a funny opportunity to see "pure" math being applied to "simple" geometry problems.

I'll be using Gödel's compactness theorem, which is well-explained here, so check it out. In essence, the theorem is as follows: In first-order logic, if a property is witnessed by arbitrarily large finite numbers, then there is a way to witness it by infinities. It certainly feels relevant in the post's context.

Consider the theory of the abelian group $\mathbb{Z}^2$ with generators $a,b$. Thus the following sentences hold:

  • $ab=ba$
  • $\forall y,\,ey=ye=y$
  • $a\ne b\ne e$
  • $a^{-1}\ne a^{1729}$
  • etc.

We collect all valid sentences into the set $\operatorname{Th}(\mathbb{Z}^2,a,b)$.

We introduce the relation $R(x,y)$, which says that "the group elements $x,y$ of $\mathbb{Z}^2$ belong to the same tile". Then the following things can be expressed as formulas/sentences:

  • $R$ is an equivalence relation (left as exercise)
  • Every tile is a single strip of rectangle, or equivalently, any two elements not on a same row/column cannot be in the same tile. We express this with infinitely many sentences. For example, $\forall x,\lnot R(x,a^{-3} b^4 x)$ would be one of them. We also need the rectangles to be connected, and they can also be expressed by infinitely many sentences, for example, $\forall x,R(x,a^6 x)\rightarrow \bigwedge_{i=1}^5 R(x,a^i x)$.
  • For a particular group element $x$, we can ask for it not to be tiled. We use the sentence $\phi(x)$, which says that $\forall y\ne x,\lnot R(x,y)$.
  • For a particular group element $x$, we can also ask for it to be tiled, and we get to choose how big the tile is! For an integer $n>0$, we use the sentence $\psi_n(x)$ to mean that $x$ is in a tile of size $\ge n$, which is expressed as: $$\left(\bigvee_{i=1-n}^0\bigwedge_{j=i}^{i+n-1} R(x,a^j x)\right)\lor\left(\bigvee_{i=1-n}^0\bigwedge_{j=i}^{i+n-1} R(x,b^j x)\right)$$

Now consider making a theory $T$ in the language of groups with the marked elements $a,b$ and the relation $R$. The consistency of this theory will claim that $S\subseteq \mathbb{Z}^2$ can be tiled by infinite-sized tiles. It will contain all appropirate axioms listed above, but we take special care when putting in any $\phi(x)$ or $\psi_n(x)$ into $T$. In particular, if $x\in S$ is an element of $\mathbb{Z}^2$ expressed as a word in $a,b$, then we put $\psi_n(x)\in T$ for all $n$ (but of course $\phi(x)\notin T$). Otherwise if $x\notin S$, then we only put $\phi(x)\in T$.

By the compactness theorem, the consistency of $T$ will follow from the consistency of every finite segment $T_0\subseteq T$. However as $T_0$ is finite, there is some bound $N\in\mathbb{N}$ such that every $\psi_n(x)\in T_0$ will be of the form $n\le N$. In particular, $T_0$ is now a segment of a theory whose consistency claims that $S$ can be tiled by rectangular tiles, and every tile has size at least $N$. By our assumption, we can simply tile $S$ by rectangular tiles of size $N$, and see that $T_0$ is indeed consistent. By the compactness theorem, $T$ is consistent.

Thus we know that $S$ can indeed be tiled by rectangles of infinite size. Any such rectangle is either a ray or can be tiled by two rays. Hence $S$ can also be tiled by rays.


Shortly after reading Edward H's answer, I realized that there is a self-contained compactness argument, which I missed the first time around; I thought I would present it here.

Let $T$ be an infinite set of polyominoes. Say that an infinite "polyomino" $P$ is an extension of $T$ if, for every finite region in the plane, its possible intersections with that region could also be an intersection of $t$, for infinitely many $t\in T$. (Intuitively, we're saying that local patches of $P$ look like part of a generic large element of $T$ - if you have a finite field of view, you can't distinguish it from infinitely many possibilities in $T$.)

Then, we claim that for every region $R$ which can be tiled by every element of $T$, $R$ has a tiling using extensions of $T$. (As a trivial consequence, at least one such extension must exist.)

In the original example, $T$ is the set of all $1\times n$ rectangles, and the extensions are $\{\text{infinite ray},\text{infinite line}\}$ - but since infinite lines can be tiled by infinite rays, we can just use the rays for everything.

Proof: For every positive integer $N$, let $S_N$ denote the square $[-N,N]\times[-N,N]$. Consider the restrictions of the tilings of $R$ to $R\cap S_n$ for each tile $t\in T$. Since there are finitely many ways to partition $R\cap S_n$ into tiles, but infinitely many tilings of $R$ by some $t\in T$, at least one of these partitions of $R\cap S_n$ must extend to a $t$-tiling of $R$ for infinitely many $t\in T$.

Now, fix our partition of $S_N\cap R$, and consider ways of extending it to a partition of $S_{N+1}\cap R$. Again, there are finitely many ways to do this, so again, of the infinitely many ways to extend to a $t$-tiling of $R$, infinitely many $t$ must cluster around one such partition. (The wording of this suggests a canonical choice of tiling for each $t\in T$, but we don't need to make this selection.)

Extending this construction inductively, we end up with a tiling of $R$ with tiles that have the property that every restriction of them to a finite square resembles (a part of) infinitely many tiles in $T$. Hence, all our tiles are extensions of $T$.


To show that this generality is actually good for something, here are some other special cases of the above theorem:

  • A region tileable by arbitrarily large squares can be tiled by infinite quadrants. (The possible extensions are quadrants, half-planes, and the whole plane, but all of these can be tiled by quadrants.)

  • A region tileable by arbitrarily long "zigzag" shapes can be tiled by an infinite staircase ray, i.e. the points $\{(x,y)\ |\ x,y\ge 0, x-y\in \{0,1\}\}$.

  • A region tileable by all "hooks" ($1\times n$ rectangles with an extra cell on the side of one end, e.g. :.......) can be tiled using an infinite ray and an infinite ray with a cell on the side of one end.

The same proof extends to most reasonable sort of grids - $\mathbb{Z}^n$, polyiamonds on the triangular grid, etc.