Question

What is the relationship between <2 and <3 ?

Answer 1

@gummibear @ganeshie8 @Shogunwolf5 @ShadowLegendX @

Answer 2

Is Chicago and Ontario parallel?

Answer 3

interior angles

Answer 4

<2+<3=180

Answer 5

@nikato yes , @kc_kennylau same side interior angles right ?

Answer 6

Yup^same side interior

Answer 7

@nikato @kc_kennylau can you help me with another one please ?

Answer 8

<JKN = <LKM because ..
A. vertical angles are congruent ,
B . Reflective property .

Answer 9

@kc_kennylau what does that mean ?

Answer 10

which school are you in? :)

Answer 11

@kc_kennylau ga connexus academy

Answer 12

A

Answer 13

@kc_kennylau can you explain it ?

Answer 14

http://www.math.com/school/subject3/images/S3U1L5DP2.gif
this is the theorem

Answer 15

@kc_kennylau but why wouldn't it be reflective property ?

Answer 16

reflective property states that an angle is congruent to ITSELF

Answer 17

@kc_kennylau can you help me ONE more ?

Answer 18

ok give me a min i need to get dressed

Answer 19

sorry i have to go, @Callisto will help you :)

Answer 20

Ok, what is it?@Faith_Rochelle

Answer 21

What information do I need to prove these triangles congruent by AAS Congruence Postulate ? I narrowed it down to <BAC = <DAC or <CBA = CDA . I can't decide between the two .

Answer 22

Actually with the diagram, BAC=DAC. And u should know that AC=AC by reflexive. So now that u know this, what else do u need for AAS?

Answer 23

<BAC=<DAC

Answer 24

@nikato oh okay , thank you .

Answer 25

So do u know what other thing u need to prove AAS?

Answer 26

@nikato wouldn't it be BAC = DAC ?

Answer 27

No, that's given

Answer 28

Based on the diagram , u have those two angles and 2 "sides" congruent. But in order to do AAS, u need 2 pair of angles and a sides to be congruent, so u still to show one more pair of angles congruent

Answer 29

@nikato its not given on my diagram ??

Answer 30

Well, u should why AC=AC.
With <BaC=<DAC, u see how in ur diagram, both of them are marked with the same number of arcs. It's just a way of saying they r equal

Answer 31

@nikato so CBA and CDA ?

Answer 32

Yup

Answer 33

@nikato do diagonals of a parallelogram always have to equal 180 ?

Answer 34

They should be becuz thy are lines or line segments if that's what ur talking about

Answer 35

@nikato can you help me with another one about angle relationships ?

Answer 36

sure

Answer 37

<1 and <2

Answer 38

@nikato what is their relationship is the question .. the choices are :
A. Adjacent
B. Linear pairs.
C. supplementary
D. vertical

Answer 39

they r just adjacent

Answer 40

@nikato why are they not linear pairs ?

Answer 41

u can take a look at this http://www.mathsisfun.com/geometry/adjacent-angles.html

Answer 42

theya re not linear because they dont form any striaght line or add up to 180

Answer 43

http://www.mathopenref.com/linearpair.html

Answer 44

@nikato okay also I am confused on this statemennt a square is ___ a rectangle . Isn't it sometimes a square is a rectangle but a rectangle is always a square ? @nikato

Answer 45

its the other around

Answer 46

a square can always be a rectangle but a rectangle can sometimes be a square

Answer 47

becuz square=parallelogram with 4 right angles and all 4 sides congrunet
rectanlge= parallelogram with 4 right angles