• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    210 days ago

    Don’t the internal angles need to be 90°? Two of those right angles aren’t right angles on the inside.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        511 days ago

        If it is a projection, then there are more than two curved sides, which also begs credence to the interpretability of the angles they intersect.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          411 days ago

          Well angles between 3 points are always going to be angles. If your choose a different configuration of dimensional parameters you can effectively project a square from the 2D plane into this exact shape, then logically the angles would follow.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      511 days ago

      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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      2611 days ago

      …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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            211 days ago

            I’ll have you know that I passed the two lowest levels of calculus required for my degree. So you know, I’m something of an expert.

      • Caveman
        link
        fedilink
        411 days ago

        Yeah, we gonna need more rigor on this one.

        “A square is a shape made up of four equally long lines a, b, c, d where a is perpendicular to c and d and parallel to b. Each of these lines meet exactly two other lines at it’s ends.”

        I’m not a mathematician so there might an odd case somewhere in there. Maybe it has to be confined to a shared plane?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          111 days ago

          So you’re saying this is the outline of a square in the astral plane? Because it sounds like you’re saying this is a square in the astral plane.

        • Sneezycat
          link
          fedilink
          English
          211 days ago

          Lines are infinitely long… do you mean line segments?

          Wikipedia has a good enough definition: “It has four straight sides of equal length and four equal angles.” Nice and simple.

          • Caveman
            link
            fedilink
            411 days ago

            Pentagon fits that definition also since it doesn’t specify “it has four and only four” sides

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    91
    edit-2
    12 days ago

    Someone never had to deal with mathematical proofs, only layman’s definitions.

    All properties of a parallelogram apply:

    • Opposite sides are parallel
    • Opposite sides are congruent
    • Opposite angles are congruent
    • Consecutive angles are supplementary
    • Diagonals bisect each other

    AND

    • All angles are congruent
    • All sides are congruent
    • Diagonals are congruent
    • Diagonals are perpendicular
    • Diagonals bisect opposite angles
    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1212 days ago

      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.

  • ☂️-
    link
    fedilink
    33
    edit-2
    12 days ago

    ITT: math people going “listen here you little shit”

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    3812 days ago

    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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      512 days ago

      Thank you for calling it out. Had a look at post history and I agree, blocked. Lemmy is attracting all sorts of random noise lately.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      712 days ago

      I’m sure there are more than a dozen and you are right. I’m still trying to get the hang of the whole fediverse thing, but so far most of the more niche communities I have tried to interact with are on different servers not federating with each other? Or maybe I’m doing something wrong? Not sure about that one. Also not sure if cross-posting works. I mean I know it works, but do those posts federate correctly? Can other fediverse apps see them correctly?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        111 days ago

        I thought it was funny, but maybe they have a point? I didn’t even realize I was on the memes community, I just assumed this was on lemmyshitpost. I guess it’s a stretch to call this joke a meme.

        • @[email protected]OP
          link
          fedilink
          211 days ago

          Honestly I have no idea what should and shouldn’t be called a meme. In my friend groups this definitely qualifies as a meme, but lemmy is way bigger than my bubble so 🤷.

          The best any of us can do is adjust based on feedback I guess.

    • Ethanol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 days ago

      Dumb question but wasn’t there a cross-posting button so you can spread this meme to other communities?

    • Semperverus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      712 days ago

      Calculus can find you two pairs of parallel sides, right there on the circle!

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        1012 days ago

        No, it isn’t. A square is a plain, convex and regular quadrilateral with four internal right angles.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          111 days ago

          In that case, there’s no need to specify anything about the angles. Or, the characterisation the meme is playing with: a shape with four straight sides of equal length and right angles. Adding parallel to the meme’s version doesn’t help.

          I’m just tired of this thread. Not only do Lemmy users have this weird urge to show off their high school maths knowledge to dunk on a joke that obviously only works because OP played with the definition, but they’re not even correct. The /r/mathmemes thread was much better.

  • burgersc12
    link
    fedilink
    English
    6912 days ago

    Does no one understand this is a joke, talking about parallel lines and mathematical proofs is pointless when its a fucking meme

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      2212 days ago

      We do understand it’s a meme and a joke. Just not a very good one, because one can easily poke holes into it.

      • burgersc12
        link
        fedilink
        English
        812 days ago

        Its supposed to be absurd, taking it seriously makes the already bad joke even worse

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          1312 days ago

          It’s not about taking it seriously. The meme wants to be a technically correct-meme, where a thing fulfills another things definition and thereby could be deemed the other thing - which creates the absurdity the meme lives off of. But in order for that kind of humour, there cannot be obvious holes in the logic of the joke and these obvious holes are very present in this meme.

          • burgersc12
            link
            fedilink
            English
            212 days ago

            Well the text in the image of the “definition” of a square is clearly tailored to fit this joke, thats why the logic of what a square actually is doesn’t apply. Its like telling Diogenes that his chicken is not technically a human because it doesn’t have two hands and a nose.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              712 days ago

              Diogenes plucked that chicken to point out Platon’s definition of a human (being a bipedal, featherless animal) being flawed. This meme leaves out parts of the definition to enforce a joke. Two different situations.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        1012 days ago

        Just not a very good one, because one can easily poke holes into it.

        That’s not how jokes work.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            3
            edit-2
            11 days ago

            No, it depends on if you have humor. Yes, humor is individual, I know. But people without tend to over analyze and try to pick the joke apart, often missing the point.

            A joke doesn’t have to pass every technicality. You thinking it’s bad if it doesn’t, only applies to your humor (or lack there of).

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              611 days ago

              Ooh, watch out, the humor police is here! Everything the deem funny is humor and if you don’t find funny what they do you don’t even have humor! Wee-ooo wee-ooo!

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                311 days ago

                I can be presented with a bad joke without the urge to pick it apart. You couldn’t. Just saying.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  2
                  edit-2
                  11 days ago

                  And you cannot take criticism. Just saying.

                  (Also, I’m not picking apart the joke, I’m explaining why some people do.)

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      3611 days ago

      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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      712 days ago

      These are parallel too. They just look that way because they are project on to the euclidean plain.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    9812 days ago

    Straight lines. Also two sets of parallel lines. This is one definition of a square, but not the common one.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      211 days ago

      This shape could exist as a projection onto an upright cylinder, wrapping around the cylinder. The two straight edges go vertically along opposite sides of the cylinder. The curved lines wrap around the circumference. The lines are now straight and parallel on the net of the cylinder.

      But we can go further: Imagine taking this cylinder and extending it. Wrap it into a loop by connecting the top to the bottom so it forms a torus (doughnut) shape. This connects both sides of the shape, now all “interior” angles are on the inside of the square, and all “exterior” angles are on the outside. The inside and outside just happen to be the same side.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        412 days ago

        I would guess on a sphere these can be straight yes: The pole goes into the center of cicular thing and radius of the sphere needs to put the other arc on one latitude.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        212 days ago

        Euclid’s first postulate: Give two points, there exists exactly one straight line that includes both of them.

  • slazer2au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1712 days ago

    If it clucks likes a chicken and scratches like a chicken, it’s Man.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        1012 days ago

        And for those who don’t: Plato, a Greek philosopher, was putatively asked by a student while teaching at the Academy what the definition of a man (human) was. Plato responded that a man is a “featherless biped”.

        Diogenes, another Greek philosopher and infamous quick-wit, caught wind of this and thought that was the dumbest thing ever, so he gate-crashed one of Plato’s lectures and pulled out a chicken which had all of its feathers plucked out and said “Behold, a man!”.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    16
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    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]