In the figure below, segment AC is congruent to segment AB: Which statement is used to prove that angle ABD is congruent to angl
e ACD?
A. Triangle ACD is similar to triangle ABD.
B. Segment AD is congruent to segment AC.
C. Angle DAC is congruent to angle DAB.
D. Angle CAB is congruent to angle CBA.
A. Triangle ACD is similar to triangle ABD.
B. Segment AD is congruent to segment AC.
C. Angle DAC is congruent to angle DAB.
D. Angle CAB is congruent to angle CBA.
1 answer:
Answer:
C.Angle DAC is congruent to angle DAB
Step-by-step explanation:
We are given that
AC is congruent to segment AB.
We have to find the statement which is used to prove that angle ABD is congruent to angle ACD.
In triangle ABD and triangle ACD
Reflexive property of congruency
(given)
(SAS Postulate)
(CPCT)
Hence, option C is true.
You might be interested in
Answer:
The probability that 5 or fewer women are hired, assuming no gender discrimination, is 0.0317; we can use this result to support her charge of gender discrimination.
Step-by-step explanation:
If we are assuming that the women and the men are equally qualified, then the probability for each employee that is hired the probability for it to be a women should be 1/2. Note that the fact that more men that women are hired in a sample might not be disctrimination: for example, if 2 men are hired out of 2 employees, that can happen with probability 1/4, so it is quite common. In order to support her charge for gender discrimination, we need at least a probability less that 0.05 that 5 (or less) women are hired out of 19 employees.
Since each configuration is equally probable, we will count the total amount of possible cases that 5 or less women are hired, and dividide it by the total amount of cases, 2¹⁹.
- 0 women hired: one possible case: every employee is male
- 1 women hired: 19 possible cases
- 2 women hired:
possible cases
- 3 women hired:
possible cases
- 4 women hired:
possible cases
- 5 women hired:
possible cases
Thus, there are a total of 11628+3876+969+171 = 16644 possible cases out of 2¹⁹ ones. All of them with seemingly equal probability. As a consequence, the probability of 5 or less women to be hired out of 19 employees, assuming that the probability to hire 1 is 1/2, is
16644/2¹⁹ = 0.0317 < 0.05
The probability that 5 or fewer women are hired, assuming no gender discrimination, is 0.0317. Since the probability is so low, we can conclude that for the employer, a woman equally qualified as a man is less likely to be hired, therefore, we can support her charge of gender discrimination.