Hi! For the last example proof, the way I did it was saying AB is ll DC and AD ll BC and my reason for that is because if alternate interior angles are congruent-->then the lines are ll. After that, I said ABCD is a parallelogram because if a quadrilateral has both pairs of opposite sides being parallel--> it's a parallelogram.
While it is true that FR is congruent to OG, the goal of this proof was the prove triangle FSG is congruent to triangle OSR. The side FR and OG do not help us get to this proving statement as quickly. I hope this helps!
Is there a difference between "congruent" and "equal to "?. The reason why I am asking is because I am looking at angle BAC being congruent to angle DAC. Will I be wrong if I interpret it as BAC=DCA?
Hi! For the last example proof, the way I did it was saying AB is ll DC and AD ll BC and my reason for that is because if alternate interior angles are congruent-->then the lines are ll. After that, I said ABCD is a parallelogram because if a quadrilateral has both pairs of opposite sides being parallel--> it's a parallelogram.
Thank you so much! This is the first time proofs have made sense to me!
It helps me in my homework love from philipines
Reflexive property ? Can be a common side
Thank you for this!!!
awesome bro!!!
Nice 👍
Best 💗💗💗
Hello, I’m confused for the second example. For the third statement why didn’t you put FR is congruent to GO when it’s a parallelogram?
While it is true that FR is congruent to OG, the goal of this proof was the prove triangle FSG is congruent to triangle OSR. The side FR and OG do not help us get to this proving statement as quickly. I hope this helps!
Is there a difference between "congruent" and "equal to "?. The reason why I am asking is because I am looking at angle BAC being congruent to angle DAC. Will I be wrong if I interpret it as BAC=DCA?
We use congruent when referring to shapes/angles in geometry and we use equal when dealing with numbers and solving. Hope this helps!