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.
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.
Wouldn’t the angles need to be interior?
also the sides must be straight
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.
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.
From the link above. I really don’t understand why you seem to think a tangent line in polar coordinates would be a circle.
Sorry that’s not what I’m saying.
I’m saying a line with constant tangent would be a circle not a line.
Let me try another way, a function with constant first derivative in polar coordinates, would draw a circle in Cartesian
Polar coordinate straight