anonymous
  • anonymous
proofs...really suck
Mathematics
  • Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
SOLVED
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
chestercat
  • chestercat
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
anonymous
  • anonymous
14. a 15. b 16. c 17. d 18. e
AriPotta
  • AriPotta
all proofs start with the same thing, so a and b would be...?
anonymous
  • anonymous
given, i know that xD

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.

More answers

AriPotta
  • AriPotta
ok, just making sure lol
AriPotta
  • AriPotta
ummm. now that i'm looking at it.....i'm not quite sure what to put....
anonymous
  • anonymous
i know angle 2 is congruent to angle 4 .....ugh lol it's so obvious stuff just don't what the answer would be
anonymous
  • anonymous
I still didn't understand how are we supposed to solve the question. Do you need to label it like 1-2-3 ?
AriPotta
  • AriPotta
you have to list the justifications for the statements in the boxes
anonymous
  • anonymous
c. by Definition of Supplementary Angles
anonymous
  • anonymous
or c. supplementary angles add up to 180
anonymous
  • anonymous
both wil work
anonymous
  • anonymous
d. by Definition of same-side interior angles
anonymous
  • anonymous
that's seriously all i have to put for d...?
AriPotta
  • AriPotta
but i don't see how you can state that they're same-side interior angles without proving that the lines are parallel
anonymous
  • anonymous
e. Converse of same-side interior angles theorem
anonymous
  • anonymous
yes, anything more than that would be irrelevent/redundant for d.

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.