Quantcast

A community for students. Sign up today!

Here's the question you clicked on:

55 members online
  • 0 replying
  • 0 viewing

Sunshine447

  • one year ago

Geometry

  • This Question is Closed
  1. Sunshine447
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

  2. Sunshine447
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    @phi

  3. phi
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Do you understand what the first statement says?

  4. Sunshine447
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    the theorem or the proof part?

  5. phi
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    I was asking about the first statement of the proof. But now that you mention it, do you understand what the theorem is saying ?

  6. Sunshine447
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    it's saying that if the diagonals split the shape in the center, then its a quadrilateral

  7. phi
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    It says if you have a quadrilateral (fancy word for a shape with 4 sides) and you know its diagonals "bisect each other" (in other words, the point where the diagonals meet is exactly in the center of both diagonals) then you have a parallelogram (very special: the opposite sides are parallel to each other) now Do you understand what the first statement of the proof says?

  8. Sunshine447
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    angle 1 = angle 2 because they are vertical angles

  9. phi
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    yes, and that is true. what about statement 2.

  10. Sunshine447
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    1/2 of each digonal is congruent to its other half because it bisects them

  11. phi
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    what does that mean?

  12. Sunshine447
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    What do you mean?

  13. phi
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Just wondering if you know that means if you divide something into 2 equal parts (exactly in half) then the two parts are equal. ok now statement 3

  14. Sunshine447
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    since 2 sides are equal (congruent) and 1 angle is equal, the two triangles are congruent

  15. phi
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    yes, SAS is short for side-angle-side statement 4. this means, go through the same steps for the 2 other triangles. it will be true. now statement 5

  16. Sunshine447
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    the trianngles are congruent based on the transitive property

  17. phi
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    it does not say that.

  18. Sunshine447
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    the givin angles are congruent by the transitive property?

  19. phi
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    statement 5 says, angle ABD = BDC by the transitive property I would wonder why we just proved 2 triangles are congruent ? If the angles ABD and BDC are = by the transitive property (what is that ?) then why did we prove triangles are congruent. on the other hand, if the angles are part of congruent triangles, we could say the angles are equal if they are corresponding parts of congruent triangles.

  20. Sunshine447
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    okay...? so is that the incorrect statement?

  21. phi
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    yes, it's not correct. She should have said the angles are equal because they are corresponding parts of congruent triangles (often abbreviated CPCT)

  22. Sunshine447
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    so its choice B?

  23. phi
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    yes.

  24. Sunshine447
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    thanks! I think I'm finally starting to understand this proof stuff

  25. phi
    • one year ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    It's tricky, but good to learn how to think logically, so you don't mess up and put on your shoes before you put on your socks...

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

    • Attachments:

Ask your own question

Ask a Question
Find more explanations on OpenStudy

Your question is ready. Sign up for free to start getting answers.

spraguer (Moderator)
5 → View Detailed Profile

is replying to Can someone tell me what button the professor is hitting...

23

  • Teamwork 19 Teammate
  • Problem Solving 19 Hero
  • You have blocked this person.
  • ✔ You're a fan Checking fan status...

Thanks for being so helpful in mathematics. If you are getting quality help, make sure you spread the word about OpenStudy.

This is the testimonial you wrote.
You haven't written a testimonial for Owlfred.