Interesting question
Usually when you look at something like that construction, you think that AB has been bisected by PQ and that the two segments are perpendicular. They are perpendicular but nowhere is that stated. So the answer is C because all the other answers are wrong.
PQ is congruent AB is not correct. As long as the arcs are equal and meet above and below AB there is no proof of congruency. In your mind widen the compass legs so that they are wider than AB and redraw the arcs. You get a larger PQ, but it has all the original properties of PQ except size.
PQ is not congruent to AQ. How would you prove conguency? You'd have to put both lines into triangles that can be proved congruent. It can't be done.
The two lines are not parallel. They are perpendicular. That can be proven. They meet at right angles to each other (also provable).
After you type in your equations and hit graph you notice that, if you are in the standard window, your parabola is cut off so you have to choose your "window" button to change the viewing window to see the whole graph. Then you would use your 2nd button and "trace" and "intersect" to find the points of intersection of the 2 graphs. The first point is at (-.90901, 16.81812) and the second point is at (5.9090909, 3.1818182). Graphing calculators are quite amazing!
Step-by-step explanation:
survey a specific amount of students and ask then if they spend les that 2 hours a night of studying or 2 or more hours a night studying.
Answer:
<h2>y=3000 (0.92)^3=2336.064=
$2336.06</h2>
Step-by-step explanation:
<h2>Mark me brainliest please</h2>
