## Do bistellar flips preserve shellability?

### Remember to vote up questions/answers you find interesting or helpful (requires 15 reputation points)

I notice there is a strong connection between shellability of simplicial complexes and bistellar flips on these complexes; in particular, adding in a new facet of a shelling induces a bistellar flip on the boundary.

Is it always the case that bistellar flips preserve shellability of a complex? In other words, if I apply a bistellar flip to a shellable simplicial complex, is the resulting simplicial complex also shellable? If so, how can this be seen easily?

-

## 1 Answer

Obviously not, because there exist non-shellable combinatorial spheres, but any combinatorial $n$-sphere is bistellar-equivalent to the boundary of the $(n+1)$-simplex.

The observation you mentioned is also in the very end of Lickorish's paper

-
{"extraction_info": {"found_math": true, "script_math_tex": 0, "script_math_asciimath": 0, "math_annotations": 0, "math_alttext": 0, "mathml": 0, "mathjax_tag": 0, "mathjax_inline_tex": 2, "mathjax_display_tex": 0, "mathjax_asciimath": 0, "img_math": 0, "codecogs_latex": 0, "wp_latex": 0, "mimetex.cgi": 0, "/images/math/codecogs": 0, "mathtex.cgi": 0}, "config": {"markdown_headings": true, "markdown_code": true, "boilerplate_config": {"ratio_threshold": 0.18, "absolute_threshold": 10, "end_threshold": 5, "enable": true}, "remove_buttons": true, "remove_image_figures": true, "remove_link_clusters": true, "table_config": {"min_rows": 2, "min_cols": 3, "format": "github"}, "remove_chinese": true, "remove_edit_buttons": true, "extract_latex": true}, "english_confidence": 0.887788712978363, "perplexity_flag": "middle"}