a. Disagree because the existing congruent corresponding parts are:
VW = SW
m∠ VWX = m∠ SWV
not enough to prove that Δ XWV ≅ Δ UWS
The part that needed but not provided to prove the triangles
congruent using SAS is XW = UW
b. Δ XWV ≅ Δ UWS by ASA postulate
Step-by-step explanation:
Let us revise the cases of congruence
1. SSS ⇒ 3 sides in the 1st Δ ≅ 3 sides in the 2nd Δ
2. SAS ⇒ 2 sides and including angle in the 1st Δ ≅ 2 sides and
including angle in the 2nd Δ
3. ASA ⇒ 2 angles and the side whose joining them in the 1st Δ
≅ 2 angles and the side whose joining them in the 2nd Δ
4. AAS ⇒ 2 angles and one side in the 1st Δ ≅ 2 angles and one side
in the 2nd Δ
In the attached figure there are two triangles
Δ XWV and Δ UWS
∵ VW = SW ⇒ given
∵ m∠VWX = m∠SWV ⇒ vertical opposite angles
- To prove that the two triangles are congruent we must have a third
condition like
XW = UW ⇒ SAS <em>OR</em>
m∠V = m∠S ⇒ ASA <em>OR</em>
m∠X = m∠U ⇒ AAS
∵ There is no other given help us to prove that the 2Δs are congruent
∴ I disagree with him because we must have one another condition
that XW= WU with the given conditions to prove that ΔXWV ≅ ΔUWS
By SAS postulate
a.
Disagree because the existing congruent corresponding parts are:
VW = SW
m∠VWX = m∠SWV
not enough to prove that ΔXWV ≅ ΔUWS
The part that needed but not provided to prove the triangles
congruent using SAS is XW = UW
b.
∵ m∠V = m∠S ⇒ given
∵ VW = SW ⇒ given
∵ m∠VWX = m∠SWV ⇒ vertical opposite angles
- 2 angles and the side whose joining them in Δ XWV ≅ 2 angles and
the side whose joining them in the Δ UWS
∴ ΔXWV ≅ ΔUWS ⇒ ASA postulate
ΔXWV ≅ ΔUWS by ASA postulate
Learn more:
You can learn more about congruence postulate of Δs in brainly.com/question/3202836
#LearnwithBrainly
