Question

A square has the coordinates (−2, 2), (−4, 2), (−4, 4), and (−2, 4) at its vertices. The transformed square has the coordinates (−6, 6), (−12, 6), (−12, 12), and (−6, 12) at its vertices.

Are the square and its transformation congruent? Why or why not?

A.
Yes, the transformation is a dilation of the square with a scale factor of 1/3
B.
Yes, the transformation is a dilation of the square with a scale factor of 3

C.
No, the transformation is a dilation of the square with a scale factor of 3

D.
No, the transformation is a dilation of the square with a scale factor of 1/3

Answer 1

Congruency means, in layman's term, that all sides remain of original length. Which is certainly not the case here. The distance between each coordinates is increased. So its safe to say that the square isn't congruent.
Now for the scale factor, each coordinate is multiplied by a certain integar. What is that integar? Work it out

Answer 2

sorry i lag out

Answer 3

so its between c and d right

Answer 4

so i need to multiplied by a certain integar right

Answer 5

A triangle has the coordinates (−3, −2), (−2, −5), and (−4, −5) at its vertices. The transformed triangle has the coordinates (3, 2), (2, 5), and (4, 5) at its vertices.

Are the triangle and its transformation congruent? Why or why not?

A.
Yes, the transformation is a 90° clockwise rotation.

B.
Yes, the transformation is a 180° clockwise rotation.

C.
No, the transformation is a 270° clockwise rotation.

D.
No, the transformation is a 360° clockwise rotation.

Answer 6

i say a

Answer 7

Yes, the transformation is a 90° clockwise rotation.