1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
I'm not a math major, but I always considered it that a square is a special case of rectangle, a rectangle is a special case of parallelogram, and a parallelogram a special case of a quadrilateral, a quadrilateral a special case of a simple polygon.
This shape isn't a polygon, so it cannot be a square.
Straight lines. Also two sets of parallel lines. This is one definition of a square, but not the common one.
I believe these lines are straight with a black hole at the centre.
straight, gay, lines are lines. let them be.
Oh let's get pedantic!
The curved edges technically have infinite "side".
....and a square has four interior 90 degree angles.
...and based on the infinite number of sides for a curved line aspect, the "90 degree" angles would all be +/- the limit as it approaches zero, so never truly 90 degrees but always an infinite fraction away.
Hey, that's my job!
Also I don't think that's technically the technical classification. I think that sidedness is an attribute that simply doesnt apply to curves.
You can approximate curves with some number of sides, and the approximation gets more accurate as the number approaches infinity, but it doesn't actually have the infinite sides.
Someone never had to deal with mathematical proofs, only layman's definitions.
All properties of a parallelogram apply:
AND
Of course, but such strict definitions only come about because smart people come up with examples like OP when you don’t add the full definition.
Does no one understand this is a joke, talking about parallel lines and mathematical proofs is pointless when its a fucking meme
It's not pointless because you can laugh about a joke and then learn something about math.
They don't cancel each other out. They can be at the same place and still work on their own.
I love memes that are funny on their own, but also provide discussion material.
We do understand it's a meme and a joke. Just not a very good one, because one can easily poke holes into it.
Or the fun part.
You're having fun wrong!!1one
Rotate the cone towards you.
Now you see this. 🤯
uhhh, wait. Under what projection is OP's "square" reduced to an actual square
It's possible, but there needs to be a thickness in addition to the length and width.
Im gonna need more than that as an explanation. Sandwiches too if you're making some
Imagine you have a cookie cutter in that shape. Cut a cookie as thick as the chord of the largest arc.
View the new vertical surface of the longest arc that is now a cylindrical section.
Viola, square. 😁
*munches thoughtfully*
this is terrible, but it tastes okay
Not a polygon
Don't the internal angles need to be 90°? Two of those right angles aren't right angles on the inside.
ITT: math people going "listen here you little shit"
Wrong. This is a definition of a [pizza] + [the extra peperoni from the other slices that got stuck to that slice because the cutting was imperfect]
I get downvoted for bringing it up, but for fuck's sake you're dumping literally everything into this community regardless of the fit. There are a dozen (I'm estimating) other communities that could benefit from the content you post but you have thus far insisted on only posting here.
Can you at least make the tiniest effort to spread content to other communities that would benefit from the increased views and potential subscriptions?
I shall await the fun police and everything's a meme comments.
At least it's better than endless American politics.
Okay, calm down Diogenes
Diogenes go home.
Learned this one in 6th grade geometry: drawing a square in thr corner doesn't make it 90°
Tut tut, all these maths books promoting unhealthy square shapes, real squares have curves.
Solution:
Explanation:
in order for the straight lines to be 90 deg with the circles, they must be radii of circles with same central point
the length of an arc is defined as c = r * θ (where r is the radius, and θ is the angle)
we define the inner circle with radius r₁ and its arc L₁ = r₁ * θ₁
we define the outer circle with radius r₂ and its arc L₂ = r₂ * θ₂
Because of (1), θ₁ + θ₂ = 2π
To create the shape, L₁ = L₂ = r₂ - r₁
If you start replacing and solving, you will get a 2nd grade quadratic, which has a positive and a negative solution. The positive solution is that magic number.
Dammit Diogenes, this is why we don't allow you in the geometry class anymore.
Thanks, I hate it.
Lines that intersect a circle like that aren't "right angles" tho, they're called "normal" to the circle - in other words pointing directly toward the center. A normal line is at right angles to a tangent line, but not to a curve.
