All categories

2 years ago

Which set of shapes contains members that are always similar to one another?

2 answers:

8 0

Ok, Let me start from the word Similar , the word which is usually used in mathematics for geometrical shapes mainly polygons.

Similar Polygons= Two or more Polygons are said to be similar if their corresponding sides are proportional and Corresponding interior angles are equal.

I will answer this question by starting from

1. Option A:→ Trapezoids= Why two trapezoids can't be similar because if we consider parallel sides of trapezoids their length can vary. Suppose One trapezoid has parallel sides of length 7 m and 13 m , and other trapezoid has parallel sides of length 6 m and 11 m.So, neither the corresponding sides are proportional nor interior angles are equal.

So, the Statement is Incorrect that All Trapezoids are always similar to one another.

2. →B.isosceles triangles=One isosceles triangle (4,4,5, 50°,50°,80°) and Other isosceles triangle being (3,3,7,55°,55°,70°).

So, the Statement is Incorrect that All Isosceles triangles are always similar to one another.

3. →→C.Equilateral triangles=All equilateral triangles will always be similar because their all interior angles will always be 60°, whatever the length of their sides.So, two equilateral triangles will always be similar because ratio of their corresponding sides will always be equal and their corresponding interior angles will always be 60°.

4. →→D.Rectangles= Consider two rectangles having Dimensions (70 × 40) and (60 × 30).

So, the Statement is Incorrect that All Rectangles are always similar to one another.

5.→→E. Pentagons :=Two Regular pentagons are always similar to each other, but not all.

So, the Statement is Incorrect that All Pentagons are always similar to one another.

Option C i.e Set of equilateral triangles, is true statement about the set of shapes which contains members that are always similar to one another.

Elden [556K]2 years ago

4 0

It should be C. Equilateral triangles

You might be interested in

According to the natural sequence of exponents, how would you explain 2-3

Vikentia [17]

We have a base 2 with an exponent power raised to -3
so in order to have a positive exponent factor, we take reciprocal of the number1/2^3.
now that the base has a positive exponent number, we simply multiply it the times on the exponent number, so: 1/2*2*2 = 1/8

hope this help

5 0

3 years ago

In 10 years, Roman will be 2 times Seth's age. 5 years ago Roman was 3 times Seth's age. HOW OLD IS SETH???

aalyn [17]

Let s be Seth's age. let r be Romans age. 5 years ago Seth was s-5 and Roman was three times as old, or 3(s-5), or 3s-15=r-5

in ten years Seth will be s+10 and Roman will be twice as old, or 2(s+10), or 2s+20=r+10
3s-15 =r-5
r=3s-10

2s+20=r+10
r=2s+10

3s-10=2s+10
s=20

Seth is 20 years old

setting the two equations equal gives us
3(s-5)=2(s+10)
3s-15=2s+20
s=35

5 0

2 years ago

FRQ 1

Reptile [31]

Answer:

a) The number of visits between the patrons who buys the season passes shows higher frequency than those who did not buy season passes, in general. However, the minimum value of 1 visit is present for both cases.

b) The mean visits of the patrons are just PARAMETERS. If you want to test your hypothesis using hypothesis testing, the statistics are the z or t scores comparing the parameters (means).

c) The proportion who would have paid less are those with 2 or fewer visits because they would only just paid $82 instead of $100.

Number of patrons with 2 or fewer visits: 16

Total number of patrons who bought season passes: 30

Proportion who would've paid less = 16/30 = 0.5333

Step-by-step explanation:

I just did it

5 0

3 years ago

Will, Mike, and Sue went to dinner. Will paid 1/3 of the dinner bill. Micah and Sue paid in the ratio 2:3. If Sue paid $6 more t

raketka [301]

Let's call their parts w,m and s

if will paid 1/3, then m+s=2w (they paid 2/3, which is twice as much as will did)

Now, we know that:
Micah and Sue paid in the ratio 2:3.
this means the 3m=2s

and m=2/3s

Again:
m+s=2w

and we substitute m:
2/3s+s=2w
5/3s=2w// multiply both sides by 3
5s=6w

we also know that s=w+6 (from the last sentence) so we substitute:

5(w+6)=6w
5w+30=6w
30=w

so, Will paid 30, Sue paid 36 (six more than him), Mike paid 24 (24:36 is the same ratio as 2:3, you can check this by dividing both 24 and 36 by 12: you have 2 and 3)

and the total was 30+36+24=90.

3 0

3 years ago

Please help will mark brainliest

Lynna [10]

Z^5/8

You can tell this because exponents get added together when multiplying and the fact that the fraction goes down by a multiple of 1/8.

6 0

3 years ago