Ask your own question, for FREE!
Mathematics 21 Online
OpenStudy (anonymous):

Jimmy’s proof: Statement 1: In triangle ADC and BCD, AD = BC (opposite sides of a rectangle are congruent) Statement 2: Angle ADC = Angle BCD (angles of a rectangle are 90°) Statement 3: DC=DC (transitive property of equality) Statement 4: Triangle ADC and BCD are congruent (by SAS postulate) Statement 5: AC = BD (by CPCTC) Which statement in Jimmy’s proof has an error?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

OpenStudy (king):

no error

OpenStudy (anonymous):

yeah apparently there is no error !!

OpenStudy (king):

Yippee!!Cheers for Jimmy!!

OpenStudy (anonymous):

no i think there can be a mistake in statement five ..... if you consider each statement independent of each other then in statement 5 the student have not mentioned the congruent triangle so may be it can be considered as incorrect ever though the relation is correct

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ever=even

OpenStudy (anonymous):

I guess.. there could be an error in statement 1 , where he says that "opposite sides of a rectangle are congruent)" but .. as far as i know, you never say they are 'congruent', you always say they are 'equal'! :/

OpenStudy (king):

if u consider each statement independent then statement 4 is also wrong as u cannot say 2 triangles are congruent without proof or reason.....

OpenStudy (anonymous):

thats CPCTC may be incorrect ....

OpenStudy (king):

as far as i know its CPCT[Corresponding Parts of Congruent Triangles] NOT CPCTC

OpenStudy (king):

nah CPCTC is rite its [Corresponding Parts of Congruent Triangles are Congruent]

OpenStudy (anonymous):

@Hashir : Naah, 'CPCTC' is absolutely correct.. because.. he already proved that the 2 triangles are equal by SAS postulate..

OpenStudy (anonymous):

i am saying that there may be a possibility .... if we consider each statement independent

OpenStudy (anonymous):

CPCTC ('Corresponding parts of congruent triangles are congruent') is nothing but another name/abbr. for CPCT ..

OpenStudy (king):

Okay Conclusion:Jimmy is an over-cautious idiot trying to find a mistake in an absolutely correct proof!!

OpenStudy (anonymous):

so 3 has a problem ... 3 is incorrect ... got it now

OpenStudy (king):

whats wrong in 3??DC=DC is not true?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

bro in transitive property we prove that if a=b and b=c then a=c .... not a=a !!!

OpenStudy (anonymous):

it doesnt make any sense

OpenStudy (anonymous):

@Hashir : I totally agree with you!!.. transitive property is --> if a=b, and b=c .. a=c! :P

OpenStudy (anonymous):

it can be correct if he says that DC=CD

OpenStudy (anonymous):

but he didnt say that

OpenStudy (king):

oh!ok!i did not know that!!so yes Jimmy being over-cautious helped him as @Hashir the detective finds the criminal eluding his 2 pardnas!

OpenStudy (king):

;D

Can't find your answer? Make a FREE account and ask your own questions, OR help others and earn volunteer hours!

Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!
Can't find your answer? Make a FREE account and ask your own questions, OR help others and earn volunteer hours!

Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!