ITT We try and piss off Euclid as hard as possible. First, using curved lines, we are going to create a shape that follows the rules and parameters of a square, but is not a square.
>TFW Squares and Circles are related but Triangles are not
>using curved lines
Pretty sure Euclid would be OK with that.
Also it would help if you stated what properties and parameters a square has, is there anything apart from four equal 90 degree angles, all equal sides, consisting of only straight lines?
You can't defy Euclid.
And if you can, I'd like to see it.
google non-euclidian geometry
>>7780446
I think we're assuming that OP is working on a plane. We all know about non-euclidean geometry, but he isn't "defying Euclid" by using different axiom(s).
>>7780428
>We
We? You? Who?
*burp*
>>7780428
>curved lines
wat
>>7780619
What is this? I've seen this pic before with no explanation, only a statement that it's someone's amateur work.
>>7780428
>>TFW Squares and Circles are related but Triangles are not
Quadrilateral <-> Triangle
Square <-> Equilateral Triangle
In the future, when something looks like it doesn't make sense, just assume that it's because you're a fucking moron.
[math] R\left( {X,Y} \right)Z = {\nabla _X}{\nabla _Y}Z - {\nabla _Y}{\nabla _X}Z - {\nabla _{\left[ {X,Y} \right]}}Z [/math]
>>7780937
All lines are straight in their respective geometry. When that geometry is projected lines can get curved.
>>7781090
>All lines are straight in their respective geometry.
Shouldn't this be more like: "all geodesics have zero acceleration in their respective metrics?"
