Question

What is the assumption needed to begin an indirect proof of the following statement?
"An angle bisector separates an angle in two equal parts." (4 points)


An angle bisector does not separate an angle in three equal parts.
An angle bisector does not separate an angle in two equal parts.
An angle bisector separates an angle in two equal parts.
An angle bisector separates an angle in three equal parts.

Answer 1

What is the assumption needed to begin an indirect proof of the following statement?
"An angle bisector separates an angle in two equal parts." (4 points)


An angle bisector does not separate an angle in three equal parts.
An angle bisector does not separate an angle in two equal parts.
An angle bisector separates an angle in two equal parts.
An angle bisector separates an angle in three equal parts.

Answer 2

@TGstudios

Answer 3

i gtg sry but the answer is B

Answer 4

I think C

Answer 5

*jaw dropped*

Answer 6

XD i gotta go bye

Answer 7

bye

Answer 8

@mathmate

Answer 9

@mathmate

Answer 10

@triciaal

Answer 11

Hey i can help

Answer 12

okay thanks!!

Answer 13

is b correct?

Answer 14

Np

Answer 15

umm lets see

Answer 16

if so then how

Answer 17

@ItryMath
Read the first step of indirect proofs here:
http://www.regentsprep.org/regents/math/geometry/gp3b/indirectlesson.htm

Answer 18

Yes b is right bc it can only seperate it in to one equal part bro

Answer 19

im confused

Answer 20

lol

Answer 21

i looked at the website mathmate provided but i understand nothing

Answer 22

and read what you typed in sebastian but im stupid so i understand nothing

Answer 23

im eating cup noobles and thinking what life i will have

Answer 24

oh well just ask your teach tmr and see if she can help you understand it bc i aced this stuf like that once i got the hang of it but i dont remember it that much no kmore

Answer 25

can i get medal?

Answer 26

NO!

Answer 27

<3

Answer 28

why :C

Answer 29

i gave you one

Answer 30

>:(

Answer 31

Yayayyay