The interior angle of a regular polygon must be a factor of 360 degrees for it to tessellate uniformly.
It they weren't equal is wouldn't make a tessellation.
If you want mathematical precision then the answer is that there need not be any angles at all and so there can be no angle relationship. Shapes like dumb-bells will tessellate, and these will have no angles. There are very many other shapes: see MC Escher's Symmetry artwork for examples.
they both measure the angle in degrees
The COEFFICIENT of Refraction.
consecutive angles
It they weren't equal is wouldn't make a tessellation.
No, the relationship between the angle of incidence and the angle of reflection remains the same regardless of the angle of incidence. This relationship is governed by the law of reflection, which states that the angle of incidence is equal to the angle of reflection.
The relationship between the fof angle and the angle of of2 is that they are supplementary angles. This means that the sum of the fof angle and the angle of of2 is equal to 180 degrees.
In a tessellation, the angle sum around a vertex depends on the type of polygons used in the tessellation. For regular polygons, the angle sum around a vertex is always 360 degrees. This is because each interior angle of a regular polygon is the same, so when multiple regular polygons meet at a vertex in a tessellation, the angles add up to 360 degrees.
A+
The tangent of an angle equals the inverse of an angle complementary to it. The relationship between the two tangents is that they are multiplicative inverses.
If you want mathematical precision then the answer is that there need not be any angles at all and so there can be no angle relationship. Shapes like dumb-bells will tessellate, and these will have no angles. There are very many other shapes: see MC Escher's Symmetry artwork for examples.
they both measure the angle in degrees
Both angles are equal.
The COEFFICIENT of Refraction.
look it upp
They both have to do with whether or not people get sunlight or if they don't.