Thank You !! what a pure example of a Proof !!.. You did a great job! ... I'll be looking at your Playlist!... Keep up the great work. You're an Excellent Presenter!.. ...
Liked the video but technically there should be an "m" in front of the arcs. Talking about measurement is different than talking about congruence. I also would note the vertices should be off point E and make point E the center or create another point that will make a center. This will show the formula more clearly that there is a center and this formula is used when you have intersecting chords not at the center. I'm a HS Geometry teacher and I'm being extremely technical. Great video fellow math teacher!!
Thanks for your insight! I made this video ages ago, before I became a teacher. There were a lot of things I picked up from rubrics over the years that have made the content way more technical. I find that these kind of proofs are more about the algebraic reasoning, but the communication has to be spot on! Hope your school year is going well!
Your videos are excellent because you show all your work. Now that you derived the formula, all the problems make sense. Knowing how a formula is derived is key to understanding the relationships and helps me solve the problems. Thank-you!
Clear explanation! I would have gone with x+y+z=180 [triangle angle sum] --> 2x+2y+2z = 360 [multiply each side by 2] and then arcAB+arcCD+2y+2z=360 [using inscribed angles like you did]. Both 2x+2y+2z and arcAB+arcCD+2y+2z are equal to 360 degrees, so 2x must be equal to arcAB+arcCD. Then x=(arcAB+arcCD)/2.
Is the intersection at the center? If so, would that make chords AD and CB diameters? If they are diameters, then angle x would be a central angle, and the measure of an arc (AB and CD) is the same as the measure of the central angle. Arc AB and CD would be congruent, so the proposition (Arc AB + Arc CD)/2 = x would become 2(Arc AB)/2 = x and that simplifies to Arc AB = x. This must be wrong..
The result "Arc AB = x" isn't wrong if your assumption about the chords being diameters is correct. However we use this theorem when they aren't diameters. In which case the central angles of either chord _won't_ be 'x' any longer but their sum still gives '2x'
I am trig can i get help with f(x) = sin(x) where x is in [-pi/2 , pi/2] plz help me you said i can pick topic so i decide this because i just cant get it and would you minded shout out for telling you to this thx if i didnt have your math help i would have failed algebra regents in 8 th grade
shrey Dimri My laptop recently crashed, so I am having trouble making videos.. I can probably have that topic uploaded by this weekend.. I am glad that the videos helped you through the regents!
shrey Dimri Thank you for your support! I have recently uploaded some videos on Geometry and Pre-Algebra. Send out a request if you want something specific!
i like math proof videos. it gives sanity to math.
💯... Well said
Thank You !! what a pure example of a Proof !!.. You did a great job! ... I'll be looking at your Playlist!... Keep up the great work. You're an Excellent Presenter!.. ...
My professor recommended this video. This is really helpful!! Thank U!!
Glad it was helpful! I appreciate that your professor is helping me grow my channel!
Liked the video but technically there should be an "m" in front of the arcs. Talking about measurement is different than talking about congruence.
I also would note the vertices should be off point E and make point E the center or create another point that will make a center. This will show the formula more clearly that there is a center and this formula is used when you have intersecting chords not at the center.
I'm a HS Geometry teacher and I'm being extremely technical. Great video fellow math teacher!!
Thanks for your insight!
I made this video ages ago, before I became a teacher. There were a lot of things I picked up from rubrics over the years that have made the content way more technical.
I find that these kind of proofs are more about the algebraic reasoning, but the communication has to be spot on!
Hope your school year is going well!
I actually went back in person since March of last year so almost a full year. It's not too bad and I hope your school year is going well too.
Wery helpful indeed! I have been struggling for so long with this problem!
Your videos are excellent because you show all your work. Now that you derived the formula, all the problems make sense. Knowing how a formula is derived is key to understanding the relationships and helps me solve the problems. Thank-you!
Clear explanation! I would have gone with x+y+z=180 [triangle angle sum] --> 2x+2y+2z = 360 [multiply each side by 2] and then arcAB+arcCD+2y+2z=360 [using inscribed angles like you did]. Both 2x+2y+2z and arcAB+arcCD+2y+2z are equal to 360 degrees, so 2x must be equal to arcAB+arcCD. Then x=(arcAB+arcCD)/2.
I like the proof! I always appreciate that there are multiple solutions to the same problem.
This is super awesome and easy to follow! Thank you!
Glad it was helpful!
I have a question: why is the arc at 1:28 twice as much as 'z'
It is another arc theorem: Inscribed Angle Theorem.
Excellent proof
Glad you enjoyed the proof! I find it very satisfying to see why the formulas work!
GREAT IDEA, BUT HOW DID YOU KNOW THAT ANGLE "E" IS EQUAL TO 2Z? SORRY, BUT I DIDN'T GET WHAT YOU SAID. ANYWAY, YOU CAN ANSWER ME HERE.
Ohhhhhh God bless you , you're such my life saviour, it's really helpful video indeed, thank you a lot
Glad it helped and thank your for supporting my oldest videos!
This video saved me life!
Love this proof
Plz dont give up doing ur videos,
Is the intersection at the center? If so, would that make chords AD and CB diameters? If they are diameters, then angle x would be a central angle, and the measure of an arc (AB and CD) is the same as the measure of the central angle. Arc AB and CD would be congruent, so the proposition (Arc AB + Arc CD)/2 = x would become 2(Arc AB)/2 = x and that simplifies to Arc AB = x. This must be wrong..
The result "Arc AB = x" isn't wrong if your assumption about the chords being diameters is correct. However we use this theorem when they aren't diameters. In which case the central angles of either chord _won't_ be 'x' any longer but their sum still gives '2x'
Thank you so much Vincent :D
thanks a lot!
You're welcome!
You are the best
I appreciate the vote of confidence! Best wishes with geometry!
you saved my ass man thank u!
Happy to help! Good luck with your class!
Grt job
Angles created by 2 intersecting straight lines always give two pairs of vertically opposite angles equal to 360 degrees. No surprise.
I am trig can i get help with
f(x) = sin(x) where x is in [-pi/2 , pi/2] plz help me you said i can pick topic so i decide this because i just cant get it and would you minded shout out for telling you to this thx if i didnt have your math help i would have failed algebra regents in 8 th grade
shrey Dimri My laptop recently crashed, so I am having trouble making videos.. I can probably have that topic uploaded by this weekend.. I am glad that the videos helped you through the regents!
Thank u
bobby dazzler !
you stop making video u were a teacher to me please start again
shrey Dimri Thank you for your support! I have recently uploaded some videos on Geometry and Pre-Algebra. Send out a request if you want something specific!
vinteachesmath I will like the quadratic formula question for trig explained plz do this! Thx!
shrey Dimri ua-cam.com/video/ICNjW5PwbtQ/v-deo.html
This is one of my older videos.. I hope it does the trick!
vincent kinda fine tho