i need some answers checked 2: Electric boogaloo
good
good
if they're both parallel to a third line that means lines1 and 2 must be parallel to each other, so true
good
good
huh the postulate normally assumes that you know the lines are parallel we don't know that yet, so we are stating that 2 is congruent to 6 6 is congruent to 8 therefore 2 is congruent to 8 which should be the transitive property
good
good
in general consecutive interior angles are not congruent, they'd be supplementary so false
hm, not quite, 6 and 12 are not corresponding angles (they would have to be in the same position and orientation) notice how 6 and 12 are on the outside side of the parallel lines, making them interior or exterior?
exterior
good so B
good
hm not quite CE = ED 5x + 80 = 7x - 2 solve for x, then plug back into AE = 4x + 5
x=41
good now plug that into 4x + 5
may I see what the proof is?
good
hm not quite 3x - 30 = 90 since its a right angle solve for x
40
|dw:1529873599319:dw| not quite, they don't have to be perpendicular, the angles just have to add up t o 180
good
hm x = 41 right so CE = 285 CD = 2*CE = 570 to account for both sides of the rectangle 570 + 570 = 1140 applying this same logic to AE AE = 169 AB = 2*169 = 338 338 + 338 = 676 so 1140 + 676 = 1816 (A)
basically your previous answer only accounted for half the perimeter
good
since the end of the fence makes 90 degree angles w/ the sides of the fence by definition the sides of the fence are perpendicular to the end fence so B can't be the solution (we are looking for a false statement) any other ideas?
A?
if the rows of crops are parallel to the sides and the sides are perpendicular to the end of the fence therefore the rows of crops are perpendicular to the end of the fence making A a true statement so it cannot be the solution
let's look at statement C the original problem never states that rows of crops are parallel to the sides of the fence making C the solution
hm, not quite AE is 169 but it's asking for CD we solved that x = 41 right? so CD = 5x + 80 + 7x - 2 = ?
570
good so 570 = your sol'n
|dw:1529876293655:dw| if its perpendicular to the first line it has to be perpendicular to the second line if the two lines are parallel so true
because <1 and <2 are in the same orientation with respect to the transversal they are ~corresponding angles~
|dw:1529876838710:dw| not quite there's only one possible line that can be drawn through P and be perp. to line l
for a y-intercept, the x-coordinate must be 0 so it can't be A
good
hm not quite to find the y-intercept, let x = 0 and solve for y in 3x + 4y = 12
4.
3(0) + 4y = 12 4y = 12 y = ?
8
4 is being multiplied by y so you have to divide both sides by 4 not subtract
3.
good so 3 = your sol'n
hang on, i actually think this is zero
a horizontal line has slope 0 not undefined
good
hm not quite remember that a vertical line only has an x not a y take the standard form equation Ax + By = C and replace y with 0
|dw:1529878258957:dw| |dw:1529878273213:dw| try to apply this logic to your problem to calculate the slope m
so just 8/-2
-4
careful with your signs (8-0)/(0 - (-2)) = 8/2 not 8/-2 so 4 not -4
good
that's point slope form standard form should look like Ax + By = C
so D
good
not quite if the equation is y = mx that means it has to pass through the point (0,0)
which of the four lines crosses the origin?
notice how only b crosses (0,0) so only line b can be the correct sol'n
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!