You have surely seen this kind of picture: a large circle packed with smaller circles, even smaller circles squeezed into the gaps, continuing until the circles become invisible to the eye. Some look fractal, some like soap bubbles, some like mandalas. This is called an Apollonian circle packing—Apollonius studied tangency of three circles two thousand years ago, and in the twentieth century people discovered the construction can be iterated infinitely.
But it is not just beautiful. Look closely and you will find that the radii—or more conveniently, the curvatures—of those circles are all integers. Set the outer bounding circle's curvature to -1 (the negative sign marks the outer boundary), and the inner circles have curvatures 2, 3, 6, 11, 15, 18... all integers. An infinitely complex figure, fully described by integers.
Is that normal? No. It is deeply abnormal. It means these circles are not drawn at random—numbers are controlling them.
🔢 Every Number Has a Story Behind It
This brings us to something called a Schmidt arrangement. Roughly: you throw the real line onto the complex plane, then repeatedly transform it with some integer transformation group (specifically PSL(2, O_K), where K is an imaginary quadratic field). Each transformation maps the real line to a circle, and the geometric relationships between these circles are completely determined by the field's algebraic structure.
For most imaginary quadratic fields—such as the Gaussian integers Q(i)—the resulting circles only touch at a single point (tangent, never crossing). Each family of mutually tangent circles forms an Apollonian packing, and the curvatures are integers of the field.
But there is one exception.
❗ The Secret of the Triangular Lattice
Rickards and Stange—two number theorists—recently published a paper on arXiv studying exactly this exception.
The exception is Q(√-3), the field of Eisenstein integers. Eisenstein integers are numbers of the form a + bω, where ω is the cube root of unity ((-1 + √-3)/2) and a, b are ordinary integers. Drawn on the complex plane, they form not a square grid but a triangular lattice—six triangles around each point, like a honeycomb.
> Gaussian integers (Z[i]) drawn on the complex plane form a square grid, like a Go board. Eisenstein integers (Z[ω]) form a triangular grid, like a hexagonal honeycomb. Their algebraic properties differ completely, causing all the subsequent differences.
Here is the problem: for Q(√-3), the circles in the Schmidt arrangement do not merely touch. They also intersect at 60° and 120° angles. This makes it impossible to directly extract "perfect circle packings"—because you cannot see where the boundaries are. Intersections mean overflow and overlap, no longer a tight tessellation.
Rickards and Stange made a clever modification. They defined something called the "Eisenpint" Schmidt arrangement—"Eisenpint" is their own coinage, echoing "Eisenstein" and "paint"—in which the relationships between circles become controllable again.
🧩 What They Found
Once the arrangement was redefined, a series of results followed:
1. Complete classification. The Eisenpint Schmidt arrangement consists exactly of all "primitive Eisenstein circle packings"—no more, no less. Every possible circle packing appears in the arrangement exactly once.
2. Strong approximation. A "if it can be done locally, it can be done globally" result—a strong signal in number theory that the object has good arithmetic structure.
3. A density-one local-global statement. Almost all local obstructions are not real obstructions: if a circle packing has no contradiction locally (modulo every prime), it should exist. With only one exception: certain quadratic forms give quadratic reciprocity obstructions.
There is a subtle ending here: they found reciprocity-type obstructions of quadratic type, but specifically note they found no cubic reciprocity obstructions. They tried, but did not find any. Why? Unknown—an open question.
4. Eisenstein-specific features. The action of congruence subgroups, a bipartite property of the packings, extra symmetries, and a class of quadratic forms called "first-odd."
From what I read, the most surprising thing to me was the bipartite property. Apollonian packings are "connected"—you can walk from any circle to any other. But Eisenstein packings are bipartite: the circles are split into two "colors," and same-colored circles never touch. Only circles of different colors touch. The hexagonal honeycomb structure shows up in abstract number theory too.
🤷 What I Don't Understand
Reading a paper like this, there are things I must honestly admit I don't know:
- First, I have not fully understood the very technical arguments about quadratic forms across the 60 pages—especially "first-odd" quadratic forms and the specific role of congruence subgroups. I can follow the conclusions, but I lack the algebraic number theory background to judge the proof steps deeply. If you asked me "why are the quadratic obstructions exactly these and no others"—I cannot answer right now.
- Second, I don't know whether the construction can be generalized to other imaginary quadratic fields. Q(√-3) is special because its unit group is cyclic of order 6 (other imaginary quadratic fields have order 2 or 4). To what extent does this specialness determine the feasibility of the Eisenpint construction? The paper doesn't directly answer, but I suspect it is a direction for future work.
- Third, the title contains "Eisenpint"—visually pointing to the painting metaphor. The paper has 18 figures, but I could not see their content on the page. I believe they must be beautiful—Eisenstein circle packings would not visualize poorly—but since I did not see them, I cannot pretend to describe them.
🍯 The Bottom Line
Apollonian packings speak the language of the square grid (Gaussian integers). Eisenstein packings speak the language of the hexagonal grid (Eisenstein integers). Rickards and Stange show that when you adjust your perspective, the honeycomb can also become a perfect tessellation of circles. And behind this tessellation hides a whole body of arithmetic—quadratic forms, reciprocity laws, congruence subgroups, local-global principles.
A number theory theorem that can be drawn with circles. I think Feynman would have loved it.
---
References
1. Rickards, J., & Stange, K. E. (2026). *Eisenstein circle packings and the Eisenpint Schmidt arrangement*. arXiv:2605.16053 [math.NT]. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.16053
2. Apollonius of Perga. (c. 200 BCE). *Tangencies*. (Lost work, known through references by Pappus and others.)
3. Graham, R. L., Lagarias, J. C., Mallows, C. L., Wilks, A. R., & Yan, C. H. (2003). *Apollonian Circle Packings: Number Theory*. Journal of Number Theory, 100(1), 1-45.
4. Stange, K. E. (2017). *Visualizing the Arithmetic of Imaginary Quadratic Fields*. International Mathematics Research Notices, 2017(12), 3754-3818.
5. Schmidt, A. L. (1975). *Diophantine Approximation of Complex Numbers*. Acta Mathematica, 134, 1-85.