Interesting question
Usually when you look at something like that construction, you think that AB has been bisected by PQ and that the two segments are perpendicular. They are perpendicular but nowhere is that stated. So the answer is C because all the other answers are wrong.
PQ is congruent AB is not correct. As long as the arcs are equal and meet above and below AB there is no proof of congruency. In your mind widen the compass legs so that they are wider than AB and redraw the arcs. You get a larger PQ, but it has all the original properties of PQ except size.
PQ is not congruent to AQ. How would you prove conguency? You'd have to put both lines into triangles that can be proved congruent. It can't be done.
The two lines are not parallel. They are perpendicular. That can be proven. They meet at right angles to each other (also provable).
law<span> states that </span>energy<span> cannot be created nor destroyed but it </span>can<span> only be transferred from one form to another form. (</span>Coal<span> - Fuel) Chemical </span>energy<span> is converted into heat </span>energy<span> during combustion. With the help of heat generated, the water is converted into steam.</span>
First, divide the shape into two figures ( a semicircle and a rectangle)
Then, find the are or the two shapes using the area formula for a semicircle (
) and the are formula for a rectangle (base x height)
Finally, add the two areas together and you have your answer
Look carefully at the first pair: (−3, 9), (−3, −5) Note that x does not change, tho' y does. This is how we recognize a vertical line (whose slope is undefined). The equation of this vertical line is x = -3.
Looking at the second pair: from (3,4) to (5,6), x increases by 2 and y by 2; thus, the slope is m = rise/run = 2/2 = 1.
Third pair: as was the case with the first pair, x does not change here, and thus the equation of this (vertical) line is x=0 (which is the y-axis). The slope is undefined.
28/42 ÷2
14/21 ÷2
2/3
28/42 in simplest form is = 2/3
