People Twitter

5266 readers

2979 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

Mark NSFW content.
No doxxing people.
Must be a tweet or similar
No bullying or international politcs
Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

743

That's a really good point. (lemmy.world)

submitted 10 months ago by FlyingSquid to c/[email protected]

77 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Sludgeyy 4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

If I took a traditional diamond shape and elongated just the bottom sides.

I feel like most would call it a diamond still. Specific term would be a kite. Many wouldn't come up with that, though. It's not an elongated parallelogram. It is not a rhombus.

"Diamonds" on bicycle playing cards have curved edges. They are not a rhombus because sides are not parallel. Most agree that it's the classic diamond shape, though.

[–] hydrospanner 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If you give someone paper and a pencil and ask them, "Please draw a diamond shape."

Most will draw a 4 sided shape with 4 equal sides.

[–] Sludgeyy -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides because they do not want to draw a sideways square, which is a rhombus, parallelogram, diamond too.

There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines

No one at the end is going to be like "yeah but you have to be sure all sides are equal" when they have some kind of weird kite shape.

There's people out there that wouldn't count a sideways square as a diamond

[–] hydrospanner 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

IDK why you think that "4 equal sides" is the same as "sideways square".

You can (and frequently do) have equal sided diamonds that aren't "sideways squares".

Seems like your main issue is geometry.

People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides

Which is fine. As long as they elongate symmetrically (which most would do), they're still four equal sides.

There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines

Yes they would. In fact most would, I'd wager.

Sounds like your concepts struggle is comprehending that "four equal sides" isn't the same as "four equal vertices".

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago

Or four equal angles. A rhombus has two pairs of opposing, equal angles.

[–] Sludgeyy -1 points 10 months ago

There is no such thing as a diamond in geometry. The correct term is a rhombus.

That shape is a kite in geometry.

You ask 100 people what that shape is.

How many are going to say diamond?

Even the people that believe diamonds have all equal sides would say "It's not a perfect diamond but it is diamond shaped"

Imagine saying "It's not a perfect square, but it is square shaped" at a rectangle.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In 1 points 10 months ago

Kites have 2 edges the same length, as do trapezoids, but they aren't touching. A Rhombus has 4 equal edges.