Given: and bisect each other. Prove: Quadrilateral ABCD is a parallelogram. Proof: Statement Reason 1. and bisect each other. gi
ven 2. AE = EC BE = ED definition of bisection 3. m∠AEB = m∠CED 4. ΔABE ≅ ΔCDE SAS criterion 5. ∠ACD ≅ ∠CAB Corresponding angles of congruent triangles are congruent. 6. converse of Alternate Interior Angles Theorem 7. m∠BEC = m∠AED Vertical Angles Theorem 8. ΔBEC ΔDEA SAS criterion for congruence 9. DBC ≅ BDA Corresponding angles of congruent triangles are congruent. 10. converse of Alternate Interior Angles Theorem 11. Quadrilateral ABCD is a parallelogram. definition of a parallelogram 1 What is the reason for step 3 of this proof? A. Alternate Interior Angles Theorem B. Corresponding angles in congruent triangles are congruent. C. For parallel lines cut by a transversal, corresponding angles are congruent. D. Vertical Angles Theorem E.
2 answers:
Answer:
To Prove: Quadrilateral ABCD is a parallelogram.
Proof: In Δ ABE and ΔCDE
1. AE = EC and BE = ED [ Diagonals bisect each other]
2.∠ AEB = ∠ CED [ vertically opposite angles]
Δ ABE ≅ ΔCDE---------- [SAS]
∠ ACD ≅ ∠CAB [Corresponding angles of congruent triangles are congruent⇒This statement is untrue ∴ these are alternate interior angles not corresponding angles.]
6. The converse of alternate interior interior angle theorem states that if two parallel lines are cut by a transversal then alternate interior angles are equal.
7. In ΔBEC and ΔAED
∠BEC = ∠AED [ Vertical Angles Theorem ]
AE = EC and BE = ED [ Diagonals bisect each other]
⇒ ΔBEC≅ ΔDEA [ SAS criterion for congruence]
9. DBC ≅ BDA [ Corresponding angles of congruent triangles are congruent⇒This statement is untrue ∴ these are alternate interior angles not corresponding angles.]
As pair of triangles are congruent ∵ quadrilateral ABCD is a parallelogram.
Step 3 is m∠AEB = m∠CED
These pair of angles are vertically opposite angles of ΔAEB and ΔCED.
Option [D. Vertical Angles Theorem] is correct.
You might be interested in
Answer:
wasn't sure what you wanted us to answer, so I have the distance formula for you, and I worked it out.
Step-by-step explanation:
hope these help (:
Standard reduction of order procedure: suppose there is a second solution of the form 
, which has derivatives
Substitute these terms into the ODE:
and replacing
, we have an ODE linear in 
:
Divide both sides by
, giving
and noting that the left hand side is a derivative of a product, namely
![\dfrac{\mathrm d}{\mathrm dx}[wx]=0](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=%5Cdfrac%7B%5Cmathrm%20d%7D%7B%5Cmathrm%20dx%7D%5Bwx%5D%3D0)
we can then integrate both sides to obtain
Solve for
:
Now
where the second term is already accounted for by
, which means 
, and the above is the general solution for the ODE.
Substitute these terms into the ODE:
and replacing
Divide both sides by
and noting that the left hand side is a derivative of a product, namely
we can then integrate both sides to obtain
Solve for
Now
where the second term is already accounted for by