Ask your own question, for FREE!
Mathematics 10 Online
OpenStudy (anonymous):

please help

OpenStudy (anonymous):

OpenStudy (anonymous):

@iGreen. @SolomonZelman

OpenStudy (anonymous):

I'm terrible at proofs :(

OpenStudy (anonymous):

Me too :(

OpenStudy (solomonzelman):

you need to determine the mistake. Read the proof while I am reading it, and tell me what you think.

OpenStudy (anonymous):

Hopefully @SolomonZelman knows. :D

OpenStudy (anonymous):

okay thanks @iGreen

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ok @SolomonZelman

OpenStudy (anonymous):

I think it's b since I don't think that statement 3 is necessary

OpenStudy (anonymous):

The answer can't be a because statement 1 was given and statement 4 was accurately labeled

OpenStudy (solomonzelman):

you know what an angle-angle-side postulate ? (they use the same angle in option 4)

OpenStudy (anonymous):

not really

OpenStudy (solomonzelman):

oh oh.... I am looking at option 5, and yes, you can't tell me that: |dw:1419020250157:dw|

OpenStudy (solomonzelman):

they are not the corresponding, or not necessarily corresponding.

OpenStudy (anonymous):

how are angles LNO and NPM congruent?

OpenStudy (solomonzelman):

I am saying that they are NOT (Necessarily) congruent, and you can see why, correct?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

yes

OpenStudy (solomonzelman):

this is what option 5 points out as a mistake

OpenStudy (anonymous):

okay, thanks so much!

OpenStudy (solomonzelman):

yes, and angle-side-side postulate is this: they have the top angle ( N) in both triangles, the angles 1 and 2, and sides NL NP equal to each other. |dw:1419020515478:dw|

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!