Ask your own question, for FREE!
Mathematics 67 Online
OpenStudy (anonymous):

is anyone here from flvs. im stuck in geometry and its really difficult to understand the lessons. does anyone have different methods of studing flvs ?

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

you taking geometry I or II ?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

1

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

ohkay, is there any specific module which flvs doesnt teach well ?

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

basic geometry is very hard to learn just by reading a book/online material im sure

OpenStudy (anonymous):

well it really isnt that im not a very consistent reader. and i prefer a teacher teaching, instead of reading online material

OpenStudy (anonymous):

would you have any suggestions ?

OpenStudy (mathmale):

Yes, Mr. Joey: please post one of your homework problems here, and then we can dive in and discuss its solution.

OpenStudy (anonymous):

well i wouldnt just want the answer i need to know how it was done ill shoot one to you

OpenStudy (mathmale):

Are you 10, 16 or 1 in that picture? :)

OpenStudy (mathmale):

Of course we'll discuss how the problem is solved!

OpenStudy (anonymous):

1

OpenStudy (anonymous):

OpenStudy (anonymous):

there are 2 questions i got wrong in the last exam

OpenStudy (mathmale):

Mr. J: Regarding question #2: Would you mind explaining why you chose (b) to be your answer?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

oh question to was just a random answer i was really confused with that lesson

OpenStudy (perl):

the first question about Stephanie is a bit odd

OpenStudy (anonymous):

the lesson is on indirect proofs

OpenStudy (perl):

if you are given three premises and a conclusion, and you want to prove by contradiction

OpenStudy (perl):

mrjoey, can you post the material right before the question on stephanie. theres some context i am missing

OpenStudy (anonymous):

no @perl that was everything

OpenStudy (perl):

hmm

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

// if you are given three premises and a conclusion, and you want to prove by contradiction :- proving \(atleast\) one premise is false is sufficient to prove the original conclusion.

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

so, the more correct answer wud be option C : One, two or three. which is bit weird way to provide the options

OpenStudy (perl):

i thought a proof by contradiction is to show there is a contradiction

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ok so that the wrong answer would be in one of the 3

OpenStudy (perl):

like two premises that are negations

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

proving any one of given premise is false, is same as showing there is a contradiction

OpenStudy (perl):

oh proving one of the given premises is false *after* assuming the conclusion is false (or assuming the negation of the conclusion)

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

yahh

OpenStudy (perl):

i was going to say, if one of the premises are false , the statement is true vacuously

OpenStudy (perl):

the wording is a bit unclear

OpenStudy (perl):

"base on her assumption to contradict the assumption and prove the original conclusion"

OpenStudy (perl):

what assumption are we talking about here?

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

yes, they're confusing 'original statement' wid 'assumed to be true statement'

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

3 statements 1 conclusion to prove the conclusion, step 1 : she assumes opposite of the given conclusion to be true, step 2 : and looks for contradiction in atleast one of the given 3 statements. step 3 : when she finds atleast one contradicting, then she concludes saying that the original conclusion is true

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

thats the basic setup for any indirect proof. see if that makes more or less sense @_mr_joey_

OpenStudy (anonymous):

yes it did

OpenStudy (anonymous):

thanks @ganeshie8

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

np :) wat about second problem ?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

well now that i look at it a second time it is either c or d

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

im inclining toward A

OpenStudy (perl):

i think its d) the progression of the statements is not logical

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

lets see

OpenStudy (perl):

i would go with A, since B doesnt make sense to me

OpenStudy (anonymous):

how would you find the answer @ganeshie8

OpenStudy (anonymous):

but why did you choose a though ?

OpenStudy (perl):

answer should be A the conclusion is MP is not a median. the conclusion was not usde to contradict the assumption,

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

To prove : MP is not a median Indirect proof : we start by assuming the opposite of wat we need to prove; step 1 : so lets assume MP is indeed a median

OpenStudy (perl):

@ganeshie8 what do they mean by 'the assumption"

OpenStudy (perl):

"the conclusion was not used to contradict the assumption"

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

@perl , step1 is the assumption

OpenStudy (perl):

ok

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ok

OpenStudy (perl):

so step 1 is assume the statement is false

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

yess.. so the given proof looks fine till step1. next verify step2 : how they arrived at contradiction

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ok

OpenStudy (perl):

you cant use the conclusion to contradict the assumption, since that would be circular

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

yess we cannot use a^2 = b^2+c^2 to prove pythagorean theorem

OpenStudy (perl):

you want to show how the assumption leads to a contradiction independently of the conclusion. after you find such a contradiction, it follows that your assumption was indeed false (so the conclusion is true)

OpenStudy (perl):

ok, sorry the english is confusing me here. this is not so well written ;)

OpenStudy (anonymous):

well i understand that if we have to proove its not a median we had to first assume that it was the median, but then what ?

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

then look for a contradiction

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

To prove : MP is not a median Indirect proof : we start by assuming the opposite of wat we need to prove; step 1 : so lets assume MP is indeed a median step 2 : for MP to be a median, P requires to be the midpoint of LN, which makes NP=LP. however this contradicts the given statement that NP > LP.

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ok

OpenStudy (anonymous):

np is longer then lp

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

our step2 looks exactly same as the contradiction argument in given proof. so step2 also looks fine in the given proof.

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ok so then it is a

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

step3 is just a customary step, so im okays wid the logical-order in the given proof. so i go wid A today :)

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ok thanks very much

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

I presume you're completing your geometry course as you're doing indirect proofs. good luck wid ur final exam !!

ganeshie8 (ganeshie8):

np... u wlc :)

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ok

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!
Latest Questions
ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh: how do i slim my waist fast
29 minutes ago 2 Replies 1 Medal
uknownprttyfacekayla: I drew this not sure what i was aiming for but i just drew what my heart guided m
1 hour ago 8 Replies 3 Medals
alphaXtiger: what is the meaning of math meaning who made it.
3 hours ago 3 Replies 3 Medals
axie: Poem I think
1 hour ago 14 Replies 3 Medals
Fz150: what is the definition of art?
1 hour ago 4 Replies 3 Medals
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!