1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Bingel [31]
3 years ago
8

Which pair of triangles can be proven congruent by SAS?

Mathematics
2 answers:
Verdich [7]3 years ago
6 0

Answer: The first pair of triangles can be proven congruent by SAS.

Step-by-step explanation:

SAS postulate says that if two sides and the included angle of a triangle are equal to two sides and the included angle of another triangle, then the two triangles are said to be congruent.

In the first pair of triangles the included angle of a triangle are equal to two sides and the included angle of another triangle, therefore by SAS postulate the two triangles are said to be congruent.

In the second figure, the pair of triangles are congruent by ASA postulate not SAS.

In the third figure, the pair of triangles are not congruent by any postulate or theorem [Because there is no SSA rule].

In the fourth figure, the pair of triangles are congruent by SSS postulate not SAS.

kow [346]3 years ago
5 0
Hi!
SAS stands for Side Angle Side
So you need two sides and then the angle needs to be between them. 
The first one works because the angle is in-between the 2 sides
The second one doesn't work because there are actually 2 angles and you only need one
The third one doesn't work because the angle isn't between both the sides.
The fourth one doesn't work because there are only sides and no angles. 
So it's only the first one!
Hope this helps!
You might be interested in
A grocer stacks oranges in a four-sided pyramid that is 7 layers high. How many oranges are in the pile?
gayaneshka [121]
Short Answer D
P(1) = 1(1+1)(2*1 + 1)/6
P(1) = 1(2)(2 +1) / 6
P(1) = 1(2)(3)/6
P(1) = 1

P(2) = 2(2+1)(2*2 + 1) / 6
P(2) = 2(3)(5) / 6
P(2) = 5 So this formula is adding as it goes along. To Find the Total all we need do is use the formula to calculate P(1) to P(7)

P(7) = 7*(7 + 1)(2*7 + 1)/6
P(7) = 7 * 8 * 15 / 6
P(7) = 7 * 4 * 5 
P(7) = 140 <<<< Answer
4 0
3 years ago
Solve the system of equations below algebraically <br> 2x+3y=6 and -5x+2y=4
Charra [1.4K]


Steps
I’m using elimination so I’m trying to get rid of y
To do that I multiply the first equation by 2 and the second by -3. Then solve
4x + 6x = 12
15x + -6x = -12
—————————
19x + 0 = 0
Divid by 19 to get x to one side. 0/19 is 0 so
X= 0
Plug that into an equation so 0 + 3y = 6
Divid by 3 and y = 2
Answer x = 0 y = 2
7 0
3 years ago
Is this proportional??
marin [14]

Answer:

No, it's not

Step-by-step explanation:

7 0
2 years ago
Use the function notation to write a recursive formula to represent the sequence: 4, 8, 12, ...
melamori03 [73]

Answer:

The correct answer is f(n) = f(n − 1) + 4

Step-by-step explanation:

Let us consider the sequence: 4, 8, 12, …

Using f(n) = f(n − 1) + 4, we can easily get the sequence.

As the first term is 4 and next term is obtained by adding 4 to the first term.

i.e. 4+4 = 8

     8+4 = 12

     12+4 = 16  and so on.

Since the next term is obtained by adding 4 to the previous term.

<em>So, f(n) = f(n-1) + 4 would be the correct recursive formula for the function of the sequence 4, 8, 12, .... </em>

<em>Verification: </em>

<em>                 f(n) = f(n-1) + 4</em>

Putting n=2 in f(n) = f(n-1) + 4 to get the second term of the sequence.

<em>                f(2) = f(2-1) + 4</em>

<em>                f(2) = f(1) + 4</em>

<em>                f(2) = 4 + 4</em>

<em>                f(2) = 8</em>

Putting n=3 in f(n) = f(n-1) + 4 to get the third term of the sequence.

<em>                 f(3) = f(3-1) + 4</em>

<em>                 f(3) = f(2) + 4</em>

<em>So, adding 4 in f(2)=8 would give us the next term i.e. 12</em>

<em>                f(3) = 8 + 4</em>

<em>                 f(3) = 12</em>

<em />

Keywords: recursive formula, sequence

Learn more about using recursive formula from brainly.com/question/1851471

#learnwithBrainly<em> </em>

7 0
2 years ago
Solve the absolute value inequality.
Alex Ar [27]

Answer: k ≤ -4 or k ≥ \frac{4}{3}

<u>Explanation:</u>

                      | 3k + 4 | ≥ 8

3k + 4 ≥ 8             or                3k + 4 ≤ -8

<u>       -4</u>  <u> -4  </u>                              <u>       -4</u>    <u>-4 </u>

3k       ≥ 4              or                3k       ≤ -12

<u>÷3       </u> <u>÷3  </u>                              <u> ÷3       </u>   <u>÷3 </u>

k        ≥ \frac{4}{3}            or                 k       ≤  -4

4 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • I need the answer please please please
    14·1 answer
  • What is the area of the figure shown below?
    11·1 answer
  • Please help! I’ll give brainliest!
    14·2 answers
  • Solve for x.<br><br> 23=79(6x−36)+9<br><br><br><br> Enter your answer in the box.<br><br> x =
    11·2 answers
  • Also the last one is a N<br> —<br> Find the measure of each missing angle in each triangle
    13·1 answer
  • I’ll give brainliest!!
    14·1 answer
  • Is (5,10) a solution for the equation y=-x+15
    8·2 answers
  • Write the equation of a line that meets all the following requirements:
    11·1 answer
  • Suppose z = . What is z4?<br><br> on EDGE 2020
    11·2 answers
  • PLEAAASEEEE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD<br> for f(x) = 5 - 2 (x + 4)^2 find<br><br> f (2a -1)
    11·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!