I think its... A (but not sure)
Answer:
65m = 6500 Cm.
Step-by-step explanation:
We cannot determine the cost of the tiles from the given information, so the question cannot be answered.
Its an indirect proof, so 3 steps :-
1) you start with the opposite of wat u need to prove
2) arrive at a contradiction
3) concludeReport · 29/6/2015261
since you wanto prove 'diagonals of a parallelogram bisect each other', you start wid the opposite of above statement, like below :- step1 : Since we want to prove 'diagonals of a parallelogram bisect each other', lets start by assuming the opposite, that the diagonals of parallelogram dont bisect each other.Report · 29/6/2015261
Since, we assumed that the diagonals dont bisect each other,
OC≠OA
OD≠OBReport · 29/6/2015261
Since, OC≠OA, △OAD is not congruent to △OCBReport · 29/6/2015261
∠AOD≅∠BOC as they are vertical angles,
∠OAD≅∠OCB they are alternate interior angles
AD≅BC, by definition of parallelogram
so, by AAS, △OAD is congruent to △OCBReport · 29/6/2015261
But, thats a contradiction as we have previously established that those triangles are congruentReport · 29/6/2015261
step3 :
since we arrived at a contradiction, our assumption is wrong. so, the opposite of our assumption must be correct. so diagonals of parallelogram bisect each other.
So u have to rearrange to find x again
You look at the equation and u can see that if u take away 14 from both sides it will leave u with:
X/-3<-2
Now as x is over - 3, the opposite of divide is multiply, so you multiply both sides by - 3.
This leaves you with your answer:
x<6
So the number line which represents this is C.
