Final answer:
The question mixes symbols from quantum mechanics related to the magnetic quantum number with geometric terminology, which leads to confusion. In geometry, measures of angles (<1, <2, <3) are not described using magnetic quantum numbers (m₁, m₂), hence the statement given is likely false or based on a misunderstanding. Additional information is needed to provide an accurate answer.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question provided seems to be confusing different concepts; the notation <1, m<2, and m<3 generally is not related to geometry but rather to quantum mechanics, specifically referring to the magnetic quantum number (m₁ or m₂), which contributes to describing an electron's behavior. An accurate question pertaining to geometry would involve the measures of angles or relationships between lines and planes, which would be represented with different notation and context.
In geometry, if we have angles labeled <1, <2, and <3, a statement like 'the measure of <1 is m<2 and m<3' would need additional context to be validated, like determining whether these angles are complementary, supplementary, or have some other defined geometric relationship. However, the provided text does not offer enough specifics to affirm such a statement as true or false without confounding it with the concepts of quantum mechanics.
Therefore, any statements combining these symbols would likely be false in a geometric context unless clearly defined otherwise in a given problem. The question appears to be a result of misunderstanding or typo, and cannot be directly addressed without additional context or clarification.