Mat Kelcey
Salgood Sam aka Max DouglasPosted without further comment 🔻
Erzkatzlerin Eklektra@salgood cursed
🏳️🌈Quin@salgood I want to see the version with four inner 90° angles.
Briala@salgood And if you specify a particular non-Euclidian surface, they could also be straight sides, too. :)
🐧DaveNull🐧 ☣️pResident Evil☣@salgood Is it actually the SAME length ? 🤯
Raven Luni@salgood Those angles are only 90 degrees at an infintesimally small point where the line meets the curve so you could argue they dont exist
Erwin Rossen 🔸@RavenLuni @salgood Well, that's the definition of an angle, right? An infinitesimal distance away, there is no angle anymore.
@erwinrossen @salgood I always saw it as the intersection of 2 vcetors but I guess youre right
Connor Cadellin@RavenLuni @erwinrossen @salgood i think this is drawn using a polar coordinate space rather than a Cartesian space. In a polar sense, the lines are all either moving longitudinally or laterally, so the 90 degree rule checks out.
Nafeon (Backup Account)@RavenLuni @erwinrossen @salgood a square is also defined as the opposing lines have to be parallel. (As they are a subbody of a parallelogram)
Shine
Michal MěchuraA good example of how all definitions leak.
SylvainMathematically, a curved line is not a side, so this does not break the definition.
Mx VerdaWhat if we change the dimensions a bit
You mean if the plan was non-Euclidian?
Of course, it could work, probably!
It would kind of breaks the joke though.
"On a plane of a shape you can't even imagine, this is a square!" 😅
I played brass in middle school. The bell of a trombone is pretty easy ti imagine :p
Yes, but that's not the point.
Most people don't know about non-Euclidian geometry, I guess it would be beyond them to imagine a plane the shape of a trombone...
Cryptomon
Dud (Mx)@salgood And the Ancient Greeks scream in horror...
potpie"αααααααααααααααα!"
Translation: "aaaaaaaaaaaaa!"
Martijn VosNot all of them.
myrmepropagandistI'm saving this for the quadrilaterals unit. Although, I do think we define "sides" to be "straight lines" which has its own problems as an undefined term. Still I like this.
cuan_knaggs
Mike Spooner
AlisonW ♿🏳️🌈♾️
Piotr Bialecki@futurebird @AlisonW @salgood so for fun, pick some reasonable definition and see if it checks out ;)
Christer Ericson@futurebird @AlisonW @salgood
The Jordan Curve Theorem?
But also see e.g. this (older article) for several practical implementations for point-in-polygon testing:
Jargoggles@futurebird @AlisonW @salgood
You have to keep the picture indoors at all times, otherwise it stops being a square.
You have to keep the picture indoors at all times, otherwise it stops being a square.
Oblomov@futurebird @salgood also, the fact that it cheats by considering _external_ right angles in two cases (sorry but those angles are 3π/2 each, not π/2) really spoils the joke for the pedants.
Fluffgar 🏴 HAS MOVED
EndlessMason@salgood Thanks, I hate it
eri 
@salgood guy who just discovered non-euclidian geometries for the first time
Bob Jamieson@salgood You could fit a round peg in there!
jt7d@scream do you have thoughts?
Amalgam@salgood it’s like when I learned that you can make a triangle where the sum of the angles exceed 180 degrees if you draw it on a sphere. Non-euclidian geometry always blows my mind
Resolviendo la incógnita 🌐@salgood They do not seem to be parallel.
I stand against genocide
xs4me2Well, if you unfold it…
Alexander ShendiTechnically the two interior angles to the left are 270° (3*pi/2), not 90° (pi/2).
Gorilla@salgood has his thinking cap on today spitting out HOT FIRE! 🔥🔥
Jon Quass@salgood
Okay but now instead of using squares to indicate the right angles, they need to use the "square" itself
Okay but now instead of using squares to indicate the right angles, they need to use the "square" itself
Horror Author Reed Alexander
Morten Hilker-Skaaning@salgood the polar coordinates actually form a square, right?
Medea Vanamonde🏳️⚧️ ♀@salgood it’s being then kind of morning isn’t it
chirospasm@salgood Diogenes would be proud
DD3AH 📡📶 🏳️🌈🌐 
Always respect the fine print 😜
Kenneth@salgood
Asks Genie: Make me square.
Not a very good proof of concept if you ask me...
Lupino@salgood let me guess: American school education?
DD@salgood TIL that the Monopoly little guy is a cube.
jasger_@salgood I really don't like what this image does to me it's so cursed
R. L. Dane 
Diogenes, I presume?
Anroth Elf@salgood Hrm... I don't think those are right angles. In all 4 cases, a straight line segment intersects an arc. The only place those intersections would be at 90 deg is at the intersection point. Which is to say, at the terminus of the straight line segment. Which is to say, not an angle, at all.
Now, the tangents of the arcs through the intersection point would, indeed, form a right angle with the intersecting line segment. But with the arcs, themselves? Nope.
This has been an annoying Fediverse reply that takes a joke pedantically seriously. Carry on.
Now, the tangents of the arcs through the intersection point would, indeed, form a right angle with the intersecting line segment. But with the arcs, themselves? Nope.
This has been an annoying Fediverse reply that takes a joke pedantically seriously. Carry on.
S★m V★rm★@salgood @mistercharlie Good to see folks finally getting red pilled on the liberal geometry scam
SteveMB@samvarma @salgood @mistercharlie
"Good to see folks finally getting red pilled on the liberal geometry scam"
"Good to see folks finally getting red pilled on the liberal geometry scam"
