How many square feet of outdoor carpet will we need for this hole​

Here is their argument. given the obtuse angle x, we make a quadrilateral abcd with ∠dab = x, and ∠abc = 90◦, and ad = bc. say the perpendicular bisector to dc meets the perpendicular bisector to ab at p. then pa = pb and pc = pd. so the triangles pad and pbc have equal sides and are congruent. thus ∠pad = ∠pbc. but pab is isosceles, hence ∠pab = ∠pba. subtracting, gives x = ∠pad−∠pab = ∠pbc −∠pba = 90◦. this is a preposterous conclusion – just where is the mistake in the "proof" and why does the argument break down there?

Which expression is equivalent to the expression below? (6c^2 + 3c) / (-4c + 2) / (2c + 1) / (4c - 1)a. 3c(2c-1) / (2c + 1)b. -3c(2c-1)^2 / (2c + 1)^2c. 3cd. -3c(just took the test its d. -3c)

Which of those sequences is a geometric sequence