yes it would as long as it kept its size
Chat with our AI personalities
No, you cannot convert a round pool into an oval pool. The measurements would be off and you would be unable to move the pieces of the round pool to form an oval.
Half an oval is called a semicircle. It's like an oval that got cut in half, so now it's just half the fun. But hey, at least it's still technically correct!
An oval is simply two circles joined at the sides by straight edges. From your x/y comments (moved to discussion) I would assume what you're trying to draw is an ellipse, which the link below describes (it also shows an oval).
An ellipse always has two axes of reflection; an oval has one or more.So, an egg-shape is an oval, but not an ellipse.In short an ellipse is an oval, but an oval may or may not be an ellipse.
First of all, you can't say "between the oval" - an oval is one shape and only one. For "between" you would have to have TWO things to be or go between. Second, the correct answer depends on what "the oval" is. Is it a specific place or a shape. I would say "into the oval" if it is a shape. If objects were placed so that they formed an oval shape, a team of people could collect within that oval space. They could go "into the oval." But "onto" would require there be a platform or something to step ON. An oval is a shape, an arrangement, not usually something you can step "onto." Keep in mind: With prepositions - like: on, in, beside, with, within, onto, through - think of a table or a door. Try in your head forming combinations like "on the table," "in the table," "through the door," or "beside the table." Those words are prepositions if you can use them like that. And the "door" or "table" or whatever noun you can use, well, that's the "object". (Have you heard the phrase "The object of the preposition"? They go together; a preposition has to have an object. Together they form a prepositional phrase: "beside the table" = "beside" the what? - the "table".