You didn't supply a list. The so-called rigid transformations of translation, rotation and reflection create congruent triangles.
Generally it's dilation by a factor about a point is preserves similarity but not congruency. Any transformation which includes such scalings but is otherwise rigid also preserves similarity but not congruency.
Answer:
C
(8)(-5)
Just multiply, 8 x -5 = -40
Answer:
Option d
Step-by-step explanation:
Other options are not eligible because
a) Integers are not irrational
b)Whole numbers start from 0 and consists positive integers only.But integers consist negative integers also.
c)Natural number consists of positive integers only.
If the question had been asked as some integers are also, then options b) and c) could have been written . But in this case , it is asked every integer is also.
Thank you!
Answer:
17−7
Step-by-step explanation:
Hope this helped good luck in your work!
Well, we could try adding up odd numbers, and look to see when we reach 400. But I'm hoping to find an easier way.
First of all ... I'm not sure this will help, but let's stop and notice it anyway ...
An odd number of odd numbers (like 1, 3, 5) add up to an odd number, but
an even number of odd numbers (like 1,3,5,7) add up to an even number.
So if the sum is going to be exactly 400, then there will have to be an even
number of items in the set.
Now, let's put down an even number of odd numbers to work with,and see
what we can notice about them:
1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 .
Number of items in the set . . . 8
Sum of all the items in the set . . . 64
Hmmm. That's interesting. 64 happens to be the square of 8 .
Do you think that might be all there is to it ?
Let's check it out:
Even-numbered lists of odd numbers:
1, 3 Items = 2, Sum = 4
1, 3, 5, 7 Items = 4, Sum = 16
1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 Items = 6, Sum = 36
1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 . . Items = 8, Sum = 64 .
Amazing ! The sum is always the square of the number of items in the set !
For a sum of 400 ... which just happens to be the square of 20,
we just need the <em><u>first 20 consecutive odd numbers</u></em>.
I slogged through it on my calculator, and it's true.
I never knew this before. It seems to be something valuable
to keep in my tool-box (and cherish always).
