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.
true or false? Help me Plz!!!
If two triangles have two angles and the included side congruent, the triangles are congruent. ASA (angle-side-angle).
so Its true
Explain why it is true.
The triangles are congruent but not by ASA.
Because it is a theorem
Which ways of proving two triangles congruent do you know?
WAIT so its true
It still takes an extra step.
There is a way that just by looking you can immediately conclude the triangles are congruent with out any extra steps.
To prove by SAS, you need to show that one other pair of sides are congruent.
o its false because not much information, right?
@ DorelTibi: sorry that we are discussing the semantics of things, but are you able to show that the triangles are congruent?
It's not SAS. We don't have info on two sides. We only know about the side in common.
Here it is: AAS. If two angles of a triangle and a not included side are congruent to corresponding parts of another triangle, the triangles are congruent.
In fact, AAS is the equivalent of ASA, since when two angles are congruent, then congruence of any other corresponding side is sufficient to show congruence. Equivalence means that all AAS cases can be shown to be ASA and vice-versa.
Indeed, AAS is easier.
In the end, if you do it by ASA, you need to show BD is congr to itself and