I really REALLY need help with this so can someone please help me.

Given the following conditional statement:

If m∠F = 90° and m∠G = 70°, then ∠F and ∠G are not supplementary.

Part A: How is proof by contradiction different from a traditional proof? What assumption statement will begin proof by contraction for the given conditional statement? (3 points)

Part B: Prove the given conditional statement is true by contradiction. (3 points)

Question

I really REALLY need help with this so can someone please help me.

Given the following conditional statement:

If m∠F = 90° and m∠G = 70°, then ∠F and ∠G are not supplementary.

Part A: How is proof by contradiction different from a traditional proof? What assumption statement will begin proof by contraction for the given conditional statement? (3 points)

Part B: Prove the given conditional statement is true by contradiction. (3 points)

Vocaloid · Answer

For part A) using proof by contradiction, you assume the opposite of the proposition. In this case, since they’re claiming that <F and <G *are not* supplementary, the opposite would be to assume they *are* supplementary.

For part B) start with the statement from part A, assuming the two angles are supplementary. If any two angles are supplementary they must add up to 180 degrees. Show that they are not supplementary, thus disproving the contradiction and proving the original statement correct.

Axolotl · Answer

@vocaloid wrote:

For part A) using proof by contradiction, you assume the opposite of the proposition. In this case, since they’re claiming that

Ok thanks for breaking it down for me :)

Axolotl · Answer

@axolotl wrote:

@vocaloid wrote:

For part A) using proof by contradiction, you assume the opposite of the proposition. In this case, since they’re claiming that

Ok thanks for breaking it down for me :)

Does this sound good? A. You assume the opposite of the proposition when you use proof by contradiction. ∠F and ∠G are supplementary. B. ∠F and ∠G are supplementary. If ∠F is 90 degrees and ∠G is 70 degrees, then the total would be 160 degrees, which means they are not supplementary. Supplementary angles add up to 180 degrees.

Gucchi · Answer

you didnt have the nearpod?

Axolotl · Answer

Do thing my answer is good, @gucchi?

Gucchi · Answer

lemme read it one sec

Gucchi · Answer

@axolotl wrote:

@vocaloid wrote:

For part A) using proof by contradiction, you assume the opposite of the proposition. In this case, since they’re claiming that

Ok thanks for breaking it down for me :)

Does this sound good? A. You assume the opposite of the proposition when you use proof by contradiction. ∠F and ∠G are supplementary. B. ∠F and ∠G are supplementary. If ∠F is 90 degrees and ∠G is 70 degrees, then the total would be 160 degrees, which means they are not supplementary. Supplementary angles add up to 180 degrees.

Looks good to me!

Axolotl · Answer

@gucchi wrote:

@axolotl wrote:

@vocaloid wrote:

For part A) using proof by contradiction, you assume the opposite of the proposition. In this case, since they’re claiming that

Ok thanks for breaking it down for me :)

Does this sound good? A. You assume the opposite of the proposition when you use proof by contradiction. ∠F and ∠G are supplementary. B. ∠F and ∠G are supplementary. If ∠F is 90 degrees and ∠G is 70 degrees, then the total would be 160 degrees, which means they are not supplementary. Supplementary angles add up to 180 degrees.

Looks good to me!

Alright then