You're reading the public-facing archive of the Category Theory Zulip server.
To join the server you need an invite. Anybody can get an invite by contacting Matteo Capucci at name dot surname at gmail dot com.
For all things related to this archive refer to the same person.
There are 6 regular polytopes in 4 dimensions - 4d analogues of the Platonic solids. The 600-cell is one with 120 vertices. The 24-cell is one with 24 vertices:
A group of high school students recently prove something cool about ways of inscribing the 24-cell in the 600-cell:
Namely, there are 25 ways to inscribe a 24-cell in a 600-cell, and we can list them in a 5 5 grid such that each row and each column gives a way of partitioning the vertices of the 600-cell into the vertices of 5 24-cells.
This reminds me of the time I watched this Numberphile video and found myself rather disappointed that there was no explanation of why there couldn't be more than 3 regular polytopes in higher dimensions.
I've never worked through the proof, but you could try to use an inductive approach.
The faces of an (n+1)-dimensional polytope must be some n-dimensional regular polytope. There are 6 regular polytopes in 4 dimensions, two of which have five-fold symmetry, so you'd have to show those two can't be faces of regular polytopes in 5 dimensions. It's also interesting to see why the 24-cell can't be the face of a regular polytope in 5 dimensions. Then you'd have to show that the only way to use an n-cube, n-simplex or n-orthoplex to be the face of an (n+1)-dimensional regular polytope is to create an (n+1)-cube, (n+1)-simplex or (n+1)-orthoplex, respectively.
That'd be the "naive" proof strategy. A fancier strategy would be to use the classification of Coxeter groups. That might be easier!
I've always been more interested in doing things with the regular polytopes we have than proving that others don't exist.