He can use:
a quarter and a dime (difference: 15)
a quarter and two nickels (difference: 20)
a dime and three nickels (difference: 5)
two dimes and a nickel (difference: 5)
Answer:
A
Step-by-step explanation:
hope this helped! please let me know if im wrong
Answer:
<h2>Kelly is wrong, with this congruent parts, we can conclude that triangles are congruent.</h2>
Step-by-step explanation:
To demonstrate congruent triangles, we need to use the proper postulates. There are at least 5 postulates we can use.
- Angle-Angle-Side Theorem (AAS theorem).
- Hypotenuse-Leg Theorem (HL theorem).
- Side-Side-Side Postulate (SSS postulate).
- Angle-Side-Angle Postulate (ASA postulate).
- Side-Angle-Side Postulate (SAS postulate).
In this case, Kelly SAS postulate, because the corresponding sides-angles-sides are congruent, i.e., KL ≅ MN and LM ≅ KN, also, all corresponding angles are congruent.
So, as you can see, only using SAS postulate, the congruency can be demonstrated. (Refer to the image attached to see an example of SAS postulate)
The geometric sequence is given by:
an=ar^(n-1)
where:
a=first term
r=common ratio
n is the nth term
given that a=4, and second term is -12, then
r=-12/4=-3
hence the formula for this case will be:
an=4(-3)^(n-1)
where n≥1