anonymous
  • anonymous
Proportionality Theorem I have the first column of the proof I just need help with the second.
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
1 Attachment
anonymous
  • anonymous
1 Attachment
anonymous
  • anonymous
@jim_thompson5910

Looking for something else?

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

More answers

anonymous
  • anonymous
the first two are most likely incorrect
anonymous
  • anonymous
Any ideas? :/
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
why do you think the first two are incorrect?
anonymous
  • anonymous
I am over all unsure about proofs. I am horrible when it comes to them
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
see attached
2 Attachments
anonymous
  • anonymous
oh wow.
anonymous
  • anonymous
guess I was right :p
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
right in that the first two lines of the 2 column proof are incorrect? Or that they are correct?
anonymous
  • anonymous
They are correct. :p
anonymous
  • anonymous
2 down 4 more lines to figure out .-.
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
why is angle ABC congruent to angle ADE ?
anonymous
  • anonymous
I dont know. because they're congruent angles?
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
That's circular reasoning and flawed. You cannot make a statement and then back up that statement with the same statement.
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
see this page https://www.mathsisfun.com/geometry/parallel-lines.html
anonymous
  • anonymous
ugh. I hate proofs. Does it have to do with Bisectors?
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
go ahead and look through the link I posted be sure to play with the interactive applet
anonymous
  • anonymous
They're corresponding angles?
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
very good
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
|dw:1433203991985:dw|
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
|dw:1433204002334:dw|
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
what about the next line?
anonymous
  • anonymous
one sec lemme fill in the third
anonymous
  • anonymous
Alrighty. give me a second to look on that link
anonymous
  • anonymous
this one confuses me.. possibly consecutive interior angles?
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
why?
anonymous
  • anonymous
theres angles in and outside.. kind of.
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
|dw:1433204262730:dw|
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
we are given that DE || BC |dw:1433204337699:dw|
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
and as you pointed out \[\Large \sphericalangle ABC \cong \sphericalangle ADE\] because they are corresponding angles |dw:1433204439413:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
Alright...
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
The same applies for angle ACB and angle AED \[\Large \sphericalangle ACB \cong \sphericalangle AED\] because they are corresponding angles |dw:1433204518237:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
soo corresponding angles again?
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
correct
anonymous
  • anonymous
Now the 5th line to me makes no sense its like a triangle then a segment
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
oops typo
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
let me fix
anonymous
  • anonymous
i see what you mean. oops. aha
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
1 Attachment
anonymous
  • anonymous
Intersecting Chords Theorem?
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
nope
anonymous
  • anonymous
so many theorems.
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
http://www.regentsprep.org/regents/math/geometry/gp11/LsimilarProof.htm
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
keep in mind that the 2 column proof builds up to what we want to aim for. Each step/line is necessary in getting to where we want to go
anonymous
  • anonymous
AA?
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
yep, Angle Angle |dw:1433205268084:dw|
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
|dw:1433205298484:dw|
anonymous
  • anonymous
Ohh.
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
so we have a pair of congruent corresponding angles, therefore that's why \(\large \triangle ABC \sim \triangle DBA\) is true (because of the AA similarity theorem)
anonymous
  • anonymous
I see what you mean.
anonymous
  • anonymous
then what about the last one?
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
any thoughts on it?
anonymous
  • anonymous
I mean. I see how they relate. corresponding sides?
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
how can we use line 5 to lead up to line 6 ?
anonymous
  • anonymous
Honestly I have no idea.
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
if you look through these theorems http://www.regentsprep.org/regents/math/geometry/gp11/LsimilarProof.htm which theorem deals with proportions?
anonymous
  • anonymous
SSS!!!(:
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
yes specifically the converse of the SSS similarity theorem
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
the SSS similarity theorem if the sides are all in proportion (as shown in the fractions), then the triangles are similar
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
converse of the SSS similarity theorem if the triangles are similar, then the sides form a proportion
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
the converse is the "backwards" version of the original, so to speak
anonymous
  • anonymous
I see. so does this look good?
1 Attachment
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
it's not just SSS theorem, it's the converse of that theorem
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
everything else looks good though
anonymous
  • anonymous
so write converse sss theorem?
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
yeah or something like that so the teacher knows
anonymous
  • anonymous
BTW this isn't a test or quiz or anything.. I see alot of students ask for answers on here.
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
ok I hope that it's not. Those sorts of things should be taken individually without any help. If anything, they should be proctored.
anonymous
  • anonymous
Anyways Thank you for the help!! It means the world!
jim_thompson5910
  • jim_thompson5910
you're welcome

Looking for something else?

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