Gabylovesyou
  • Gabylovesyou
Write an indirect proof to show that a rectangle has congruent diagonals. Be sure to create and name the appropriate geometric figures. This figure does not need to be submitted.
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.
schrodinger
  • schrodinger
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
Gabylovesyou
  • Gabylovesyou
@ganeshie8 @phi @AccessDenied
phi
  • phi
Here is what an indirect proof means http://regentsprep.org/Regents/math/geometry/GP3b/indirectlesson.htm
Gabylovesyou
  • Gabylovesyou
ok.. so i would first start with A rectangle doesn't have congruent diagonals

Looking for something else?

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

More answers

phi
  • phi
yes. That is as far as I got so far.
Gabylovesyou
  • Gabylovesyou
lol! what happens next ? ;s
phi
  • phi
draw a picture of a rectangle, label the sides , show the right angles. draw in a diagonal
Gabylovesyou
  • Gabylovesyou
|dw:1396376755171:dw|
phi
  • phi
show the angles are all 90º
Gabylovesyou
  • Gabylovesyou
|dw:1396376914251:dw|
phi
  • phi
the first thing that comes to mind is using pythagoras to find the length of a diagonal that leads to a direct proof. maybe we can tweak it to make in indirect.
Gabylovesyou
  • Gabylovesyou
ok
phi
  • phi
|dw:1396377047759:dw|
phi
  • phi
does that make sense (so far ?)
Gabylovesyou
  • Gabylovesyou
yes
phi
  • phi
we could do the same thing for the other diagonal |dw:1396377220075:dw|
phi
  • phi
if the diagonals are not equal to each other, that means a^2+b^2 ≠ a^2 + b^2 and that would only happen if we were not allowed to use the pythagorean theorem. But we have a right triangle (with 90º angle) so we are allowed. therefore our assumption that the diagonals are different must be wrong. that sure sounds convoluted, but it's the best I can come up with.
Gabylovesyou
  • Gabylovesyou
the equal sign thing means does not equal ?
phi
  • phi
yes, ≠ means does not equal
Gabylovesyou
  • Gabylovesyou
ok so i tried doing it in my own words... im going to put it and then delete it
Gabylovesyou
  • Gabylovesyou
@phi
Gabylovesyou
  • Gabylovesyou
@phi DONT LEAVE ME haha
phi
  • phi
I would change that means that a^2 + b^2 does not equal a^2 + b^2 if we are not allowed to that means that a^2 + b^2 does not equal a^2 + b^2 SO we are not allowed
Gabylovesyou
  • Gabylovesyou
thanks

Looking for something else?

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