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