is anybody good at proofs?
@sleepyhead314 can you help me?
question first... I haven't done proofs in a long time
|dw:1418776804328:dw| so the given is OM is perpedicular to LN, then the next step has a reason but no statement. The reason is if 2 angles are perpendicular, then they form four right angles. what would the statement be
"then they form four right angles" that would be saying something like "[these] angles are right angles" replace [these] with the correct name for the angles :)
so would it be <M is congruent to <LMO
@sleepyhead314
not just <M for the first
because <M can be two different angles
have toe be specific
the <LMO was right now name the other one like that
so the other one would be <NMO
yes :)
thanks i have another questions
ok
so after that statement, theres another one with a reason without a statement. the reasons is right angle congruence theorem
that means that if two angles are both right angles then they are congruent?
so would the statement be just <M
no statement would be [angle] is congruent to [angle] because of this right angle theorem
oh. but i have no clue what it would be
"that means that if two angles are both right angles then they are congruent" what two angles did we just say were right angles? :P
so its the same thing?
oh wait o-o for the first one it would have been [angle] and [angle] are right angles then this one would be [angle] is congruent to [angle]
wait what
Statement: [angle] and [angle] are right angles Reason: If 2 angles are perpendicular, then they form four right angles. Statement: [angle] is congruent to [angle] Reason: right angle congruence theorem
wait so what would be the statement for right angle congruence theorem and is <NMO congruent to <LMO still for the reason of if 2 angles are perpendicular, then they form 4 right angles?? Im confusedd!
sorry about that for the "then they form 4 right angles" you will have to state that "these angles are right angles" for the "congruence theorem" you will state that "these angles are congruent" does that make more sense? :/
no
where'd I loose you?
idk im just confused can we just start the whole proof over
yeah sure
ok so 1.statement- segement OM is perpendicular to segment LN 1.reason-given 2. statement-? 2.reason-if 2 angles are perpendicular they they form 4 right angles so i need to fine the statement for 2
here is how you do it: when they give you the reason and want you to get a statement, you take the part After the "Then" in the reason and make it your statement so for "if 2 angles are perpendicular they they form 4 right angles" you take "then they form 4 right angles" so your statement would be "these angles are right angles"
but what angles are right angles?
they are the ones we talked about earlier :) the two angles that I told you to be more specific with?
<M and <LMO?
yes except a more specific <M
so <NMO?
yes! so you have "<NMO and <LMO are right angles"
ok next for 3. statement-? 3.Reason-right angles congruence theorem what about that one?
"congruence theorem" so you're going to say that something is congruent :)
so <NMO and <LMO are congruent?
correct! :)
yaayyyy!!! thank yoouuu!!
glad I could help :)
if i get stuck on a question next tome i have homework can i tag you?
of course :)
thanks!
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!