interior angle = (sides - 2) * 180 / sides
sides * interior angle = 180 * sides - 360
sides * (interior angle - 180) = -360
sides = -360 / (interior angle - 180)
sides = 360 / (180 - interior angle)
So, for 144 degrees:
sides = 360 / 36 = 10
This is easiest to work out using the exterior angle.
The sum of the exterior angles of a polygon is 360o
Interior_angle + exterior_angle = 180o
⇒ exterior_angle = 180o - interior_angle
= 180o - 144o
= 36o
In a regular polygon, all angles are the same thus:
exterior_angle x number_sides = 360o
⇒ number_of_sides = 360o ÷ exterior_angle
= 360o ÷ 36o
= 10 sides
The shape is a decagon.
Only when it is a regular polygon that all interior angles are of equal measure
Only if the polygon is "regular".
No.
Only when the polygon is a regular convex polygon. Such as an equilateral triangle, or a square, or a regular pentagon.
If it's a regular polygon then each interior angle measures 120 degrees.
Only when it is a regular polygon that all interior angles are of equal measure
Only if the polygon is "regular".
A 13 sided regular polygon
Only if the polygon is a "regular" one.
No.
No. To elaborate, the smallest regular polygon, an equilateral triangle, has 60 degree interior angles. The next larger one, a square, has 90 degree interior angles. In fact, for any regular polygon, the interior angles measure 180*(n-2)/n degrees, where n is the number of sides. No polygon has less than 3 sides. Thus, no regular polygon can have interior angles less than 60 degrees.
Only when the polygon is a regular convex polygon. Such as an equilateral triangle, or a square, or a regular pentagon.
6
this depends on what type of polygon it is.. if it is a regular triangle, then all interior angles measure up to 180 degrees. So, a triangles interior angles would measure 60 degrees each.
This is a tautological question that does not have a proper answer. A regular polygon is one which has all its sides of equal length and all its interior angles of equal measure.
Most certainly. That regular polygon is an equilateral triangle.
No, it's not.