When you miss one important constraint in your CAD project.

Oh man I felt this.

Wouldn’t the angles need to be interior?

They are all interior to the meme

This meme seems to be in a 16:9 ratio making it a rectangle.

also the sides must be straight

It’s 2024 now… Not everyone has to be straight anymore!

If you want to claim you are a square, you need.

WOW! just wow, do you hear yourself?

It’s actually illegal

Believe it or not, straight to jail.

Hi.

Define straight in a precise, mathematical way.

The tangent of all points along the line equal that line

Only true in Cartesian coordinates.

A straight line in polar coordinates with the same tangent would be a circle.

EDIT: it is still a “straight” line. But then the result of a square on a surface is not the same shape any more.

A straight line in polar coordinates with the same tangent would be a circle.

I’m not sure that’s true. In non-euclidean geometry it might be, but aren’t polar coordinates just an alternative way of expressing cartesian?

Looking at a libre textbook, it seems to be showing that a tangent line in polar coordinates is still a straight line, not a circle.

I’m saying that the tangent of a straight line in Cartesian coordinates, projected into polar, does not have constant tangent. A line with a constant tangent in polar, would look like a circle in Cartesian.

Polar Functions and dydx

We are interested in the lines tangent a given graph, regardless of whether that graph is produced by rectangular, parametric, or polar equations. In each of these contexts, the slope of the tangent line is dydx. Given r=f(θ), we are generally not concerned with r′=f′(θ); that describes how fast r changes with respect to θ. Instead, we will use x=f(θ)cosθ, y=f(θ)sinθ to compute dydx.

From the link above. I really don’t understand why you seem to think a tangent line in polar coordinates would be a circle.

geodesic

I knew math was homophobic!

This is merely a projection of a square on the surface of a cone projected onto a plane.

This is also not a polygon. It has infinite and 2 sides at the same time.

This actually has six right angles if you include exterior ones.

Kinda forgot the sides being parallel part. Like missing a step in assembling IKEA furniture, its not gonna turn out right.

You don’t

*normally*need to specify that the sides are parallel if you specify four right angles.Also pretty sure definition of a shape requires only one enclosed or contiguous area.

This one is enclosed and contiguous though, the lines of the triangle end where the circular line starts. (The rest is just a drafting residue.)

No, it is 2 contiguous regions. The line of separation is the bounding line of a “shape.”

Otherwise, the entire whitespace outside of the region is also part of the shape, as is anything it touches.