What's the rigirous proof for the statement:
When the internal angles meeting at a vertex are added, if the sum $<360$ then it's the polyhedra is convex, if the sum $= 360$ it's flat and $>360$ is concave.
What's the rigirous proof for the statement:
When the internal angles meeting at a vertex are added, if the sum $<360$ then it's the polyhedra is convex, if the sum $= 360$ it's flat and $>360$ is concave.
Copyright © 2021 JogjaFile Inc.
The statement you gave, being out of context, clearly is wrong.
Even when considering the additional restriction to uniform polyhedra only, then there still exist counterexamples for your proposition: e.g. the small stellated dodecahedron (one of the Kepler-Poinsot solids) has 5 regular pentagrams per vertex, i.e. it has a local sum of $\,5\cdot 36°=180°<360°$, but because of using pentagrams it clearly is a (globally) non-convex (aka concave) polyhedron.
Btw., would you think that this magic would occur only because of the starry facial pentagrams? Well then consider a usual regular icosahedron with the top-most pentagonal pyramidal cap dimpled inwards instead. Then the such deformed polyhedron obviously becomes concave, while the local vertex sum still remains $\,5\cdot 60°=300°<360°\,$ all over on any of its vertices!
--- rk