please help
@Will.H
Not so sure about this maybe @563blackghost can help she's a great
ok thanks for trying @Will.H
Im best with proving angles in shapes or diagrams with tranversal but ill try my best :) though I do know that @Directrix can help best as well ^.^
lol okay sounds good ^.^
Now I do believe we start with Statment 1 being `AC is congruent to BC` now this is Given. this also applies to `AD is congruent to BE` which would be given as well. Now for Statment 2 we see `D is the midpoint of AC` this is due to the fact of the `midpoint formula`. We also would put for the statement `E is the midpoint of BC` which goes with the same reason. So it would be set as. Statment 1.AC is congruent to BC 1. AD is congruent to BE 2. D is the midpoint of AC 2. E is the midpoint of BC Reason 1. Given 2. Midpoint Formula This is what we have so far.
ok thanks im going to go over it and try to understand it lol
Due to the fact it is mid-point the two lengths on either side are infact equal to each other so... Statment 3. AD = DC 3. BE = EC Reason Definition of Midpoint
ghosty it isn't a midpoint how about we prove that the triangles are congruent and then by that fact the corresponding parts of congruent triangles are congruent?
i mean if it was midpoint i think they would mentions such a fact
O.o I saw as midpoint though it would make sense with CPCTC.
yeah i guess so
but then i still think the midpoint applies.
so do you have to prove that two angles or two sides are congruent? or is it not necessary?
i think it would be like this
Dang I was way off, that makes a lot more sense.
well that does make more sense
`angle c = angle c : reflexive property of equality`
thanks guys your the best ^.^
yes good point ghosty and you welcome Alexis
Nicely done will ;)
Thanks ;)
jaja yea nicley done will
Thanks Alexis
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!