All answers to bridge math

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?

Danny draws a transversal, t, on two parallel lines ab and cd, as shown below: he makes the following table to prove that the alternate interior angles are equal: which is the missing justification? (6 points) corresponding angles formed by a transversal on parallel lines are supplementary. corresponding angles formed by a transversal on parallel lines are congruent. co-interior angles formed by a transversal on parallel lines are congruent. co-exterior angles formed by a transversal on parallel lines are congruent.

Ateacher brought a pack of 17 batteries . each calculator uses 3 batteries . how many calculator can the teacher fill with batteries