princeevee:

i need some help

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
princeevee:

@Vocaloid

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

hm, not quite, the original length of QR is 5 and the scale factor is 1.5 right so the new length Q'R' is just 5 * 1.5

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

first you must calculate the area of the triangle that's on the graph area = (1/2)bh

2 months ago
princeevee:

so 108?

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

108? judging by the size of the triangle it's much smaller than that the base of the triangle is KM, how long is KM?

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

|dw:1529801081890:dw|

2 months ago
princeevee:

6, or -6

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

|dw:1529801087031:dw|

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

area is always positive, so 6 not -6 now, that's the area of the original triangle, but we want the dilated one for area, we apply the scale factor twice so 6 * 1/4 * 1/4 --> simplify to get your sol'n

2 months ago
princeevee:

0.06

2 months ago
princeevee:

so it's just 6?

2 months ago
princeevee:

ot like, 600?

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

the scale factor is 1/4 the original area is 6 6 * (1/4) * (1/4) = ?

2 months ago
princeevee:

0.375

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

good (idk whether they want decimals or fractions, since they give you 1/4 they may want 3/8 as the solution instead of 0.375)

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

good

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

hm not quite check your calculations again triangle proportionality theorem 3/(x-1) = 5/(x+1) solve for x

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

might be going soon but you just need to cross multiply 3(x+1) = 5(x-1) distribute the 3 and the 5 then solve for x

2 months ago
princeevee:

4

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

good so x = 4 = your sol'n

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

notice how we are only given two angles so it must be angle-angle

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

going to get some dinner

2 months ago
princeevee:

ok

2 months ago
princeevee:

@Vocaloid back yet?

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

yes

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

hm not quite symmetric states that if b = a then a = b notice how we have UXA ~ WXY WXY ~ VXZ therefore UXA ~ VXZ this is another form of the transitive property

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

other way around since x + 4 and 8 are the sides of the small triangle and 18 and 10 are the sides of the big triangle it has to be (x+4)/18 = 8/10 not 10/8

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

hm if we rotate the triangle so that they're both in the same orientation we can see we have the proportion 12/10 = 15/12.5 right? that means the two sides given are similar

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

so we have two sides the angle next to the two sides this is the SSA similarity theorem (unlike SSA congruence theorem which doesn't exist, SSA similarity is real)

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

wait

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

huh, weird, SSA isn't one of the choices let's go with your choice then

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

good

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

careful is 4/5 equal to 9/10?

2 months ago
princeevee:

so C?

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

good

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

good

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

huh not sure how to solve this but A is the only one that seems physically possible

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

good

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

almost MLN and OLN are not corresponding (try rotating the two halves so the congruent sides are lined up) it ends up being ONL and MLN (first choice) the ones being congruent

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

sides across from bigger angles are bigger so FG has to be less than KM

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

*less than ML

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

so it needs to be a less than sign (without the equal part)

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

hm, not quite, it only tells you which angles are bigger than others, so false

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

|dw:1529810412380:dw|

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

|dw:1529810417532:dw| not quite it has to be the angles in between the two congruent sides so the two angles marked in yellow

2 months ago
princeevee:

so...wait...

2 months ago
princeevee:

UVT and WVT?

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

*WTV not WVT (pay attention to the letter order) so D

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

not quite for an indirect proof, take the "prove" statement and assume the opposite

2 months ago
princeevee:

so B?

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

good

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

hm. not quite. the left angle is smaller than the right angle so the left segment is smaller than the right segment so the right segment needs to be longer than 27 not shorter

2 months ago
princeevee:

so 29?

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

yup good

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

hm not quite notice how the side across from S is larger than the side across from B so S is bigger than B

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
princeevee:

@Vocaloid

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

notice how it's in the form a = b then b = a which property of equality is this?

2 months ago
princeevee:

reflexive?

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

|dw:1529815379604:dw| symmetric not reflexive reflexive would be a = a

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

can I see what the paragraph proof is?

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

alright, B is correct then

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

good but make sure to spell it right *transitive

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

EF = FG FG = GH therefore EF = GH this is transitive not symmetric

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

<1 is congruent to <2 <2 is congruent to <3 <1 is congruent to <3 using the same logic as before, transitive

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

|dw:1529817250658:dw|

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

nothing is being added together so segment addition isn't applicable notice how something is stated to be equal to itself (reflexive)

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

I think we did this one already we said it was a case of congruent complements

2 months ago
princeevee:

oh, right, i forgot..

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

same logic as before, if something is equal to itself it's reflexive not addition

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
princeevee:

i dont know if we've done this question before, possibly, i;m just tired atm

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

good

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

good

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
princeevee:

this one i feel we did before

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

oh I think I finally figured out this one since they went from 90 + BAD = 180, they subtracted 90 from both sides to get BAD = 90 so subtraction not symmetric

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

hm it says "definition of" so they're probably looking for the name of a geometric figure not a postulate so "congruent segments" is probably what they're looking for

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

not segment addition. nothing is being added up. AB = EF EF = CD AB = CD via transitive

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
princeevee:

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

hm, not quite it's only talking about <QRS which is only one angle so it cannot be a pair looking at QRS is it a right angle or a straight angle?

2 months ago
princeevee:

straight

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

good so A is the better option

2 months ago
Vocaloid:

it's about 2 in the morning here so i'd better get to bed will be on tomorrow if no other plans come up

2 months ago