About proofs.. Given: Quadrilateral ABCD, line segment AD is congruent to line segment BC and angle DAE is congruent to angle BCE Prove: Triangle AEF is congruent to triangle CEG Someone please help me out with statements and reasons, totally lost. (:
Ok. First we draw a picture.
I have the picture, it was given. This is from a regents review.
Well, you should provide the picture, because E comes out of nowhere.
Give me a minute, I'll upload one.
Picture
ABCD is a parallelogram because of the alternate interior angles
in a parallelogram, diagonals bisect each other.
due to ASA congruence thesetwo triangles are congruent.
Im confused.. are those my statements or reasons along with? I'm a hopeless case when it comes to proofs..sorry to frustrate you..
in triangles AEF and CEG Angle DAE = Angle BCE ( given) AE = EC (given) Angle FEA = Angle GEC ( vertically opposite) therefore triangles AEF and CEG are congruent by A A S test The FE = EG corresponding sides in congruent triangles
*ASA
@campbell_st , that's not correct...
in triangles AEF and CEG Angle DAE = Angle BCE ( given) AE = EC Angle FEA = Angle GEC ( vertically opposite) therefore triangles AEF and CEG are congruent by A S A test The FE = EG corresponding sides in congruent triangles
My teacher mentioned that you use Alternate Interior Angles to prove parallel lines...
AE=EC is because ABCD is a parallelogram
ABCD is a parallelogram because of the angles given.
(one pair of congruent and parallel sides makes a parallelogram)
you're not asking to prove parallel lines you're asked to prove congruency and with the proves ASA and AAS are the same proves... its showing 2 angles ( and subsequently the 3rd) and a side in 1 triangle are congruent to another.
Uhm, no.
I understand what I'm trying to prove and need to end up using a triangle congruence theorem, but to get to that, apparently I did it wrong the first time.
you can say AD and BC are parallel bot there is no information about AB and CD to say they are parallel.... the quadrilateral could be a trapezium...
AE = EC (given) is wrong.
That's not given dude.
That's proved
by showing quadrilateral ABCD is a parallelogram, and that a parallelogram's diagonals bisect each other.
if you use my solution us have don it correctly... its just that it doesn't agree with you're teacher's solution.... perhaps because he wanted a specific method rather then the more lateral solution of proving congruency... by any method
you can say AD and BC are parallel bot there is no information about AB and CD to say they are parallel.... the quadrilateral could be a trapezium... COmpletely wrong One pair of parallel and congruent sides detemnes a parallelogram.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallelogram#Characterizations
Read wikipedia before you say that it isn't a parallelogram.
well good luck
And, @campbell_st , your proof is completely wrong.
inkyvoyd- i'm agreeing with your explanations only because it sounds as how my teacher would've put it. Now I ask of you if you could easily write out the statements and reason in a charted way such as Statements | Reasons ______________________________________ 1. Quadrilateral ABCD ... etc | 1. Given
AD is congruent to line segment BC It says absolutely nothing about AE and EC
Alright, I'm going to just prove that AE is congruent to EC, because that's all that we are missing.
1. AD is parallel to BC (Converse of the alternate interior angles theorem) 2. angle DAE is congruent to angle BCE (Given) 3. Quadrilateral ABCD is a parallelogram (One set of congruent and parallel sides determines a parallelogram) #This is usually assumed as "common knowledge" in geometry, so you don't have to prove it, unless specifically requested. 4. DB bisects AC (Properties of a parallelogram) 5. AE is congruent to EC (definition of bisection)
@deckedinchrome , there you go, I am so NOT typing that again, waht a pain lol
here is the proof Angle DAE = Angle BCA ( given) therefore AD is parallel to CB prove congrency in triangles ADE and BCE Angle DAE = Angle BCE (given) DA = CB (given) Angle ADE = Angle CBE ( interior alt angles AD//CB) Triangles are congruent by ASA test then AE = CE corresponding angles in congruent triangles so in Triangles FEA and CEG angle FAE = angle CGE (given) Angle FEA = angle CEG ( vertically opposite) AE = CE (proved above) therefore triangles ADE and BCE are congruent by ASA test..,. QED
Well, that works too 0.o
oops AE = EC corresponding sides in congruent triangles
Techinically we just did the same proof...
You just proved that ABCD is a parallelogram, while I assumed that it was..
i.e. your answer is better than mine, but mine would get full credit as well.
the question says prove.... not assume...
What do you mean by "converse of the alternate interior theorem"?
No.
It is common knowledge that parallelograms are determined by one pair of parallel congruent sides
Don't tell me it isn't, I learned that in both America and Taiwan, a total of three times. I also self studied it.
And, converse means
if a, then b converse: if b, then a
Converses are not always true, but for the alternate interior angle theorem, the converse is valid as well as the original statement.
it shows AD and CB are parallel... thats all.... but good luck with your geomerty
No, AD and CB are congruent.
Congruent+parallel means it is a parallelogram.
Did you even read wikipedia dude?-.-
*congruen and parallel
lol.... well whatever you believe.... its proven.... simple as that
Guys. quit blowing up my question with your arguments. Also, Wikipedia is an unreliable source that can be edited by anyone. Also: for #4 in the proof from inkyvoyd, explain properties of a parallelogram
Wikipedia is a reliable source when you check the citations.
That particular block just happens to have 2 (yes -.-) citations.
@Hero , please explain what I'm trying to say, as well as help decked here out, before I rage quit.
(my proof, not wikipedia's credibility lool)
And @deckedinchrome , that part is also common knowledge. Go read wikipedia for proof,
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallelogram#Proof that diagonals bisect each other
this stuff all depends on you motivation... I find it easier to have good basics that can be applied to any question than relying on a memory full of facts i may or may not use
Well, I find it good to have both.
Asian math has trained me to be able to rely on memory, because the problems that we get can get much much harder
Alright. Nevermind. You're frustrated as me because I'm clearly a dumb blonde in geometry. Your reasons are too logical and your knowledge base is clearly that of much higher than mine. I just bullpelletted my way through the proof, and we'll see how it goes. Thanks for the help.
hard to the point that it might be 7 or 8 steps of "basic" knowledge. if you use memorization, it becomes maybe 3 or 4 steps. STill hard, but much faster.
@deckedinchrome , campbell provided a valid proof as well.
I just don't like him lool
lol... good luck to you... and close the question
Not yet.
Hero is going to help you out.
At least, I hope he will.
If you're studying for Geometry Regents exams, here's a resource that might help. http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAA216E5D8E78F8FD&feature=plcp
(I assume that decked has been thoroughly trolled)
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!