Form V
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

+5
jerickson
kruggg
luke
Paul
jandrews
9 posters

Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  jandrews Tue Dec 16, 2008 9:05 am

I apologize profusely for my lack of theorem sheet.
By the way, this contains the correct answers to the true/false, so if you haven't done them, I would do them and check.
*Disclaimer: these are by no means all correct. I probably missed about 10 (max), but Matoka checked my work. Feel free to correct me*
Abbreviations:
Δ=triangle
θ=angle
mθ=measure of angle
ψ=congruent
ω=Parallel
μ=not equal to





















1.F; Commutative Property
2.T; Z is a subset of R
3.T; Ruler Postulate
4.F; Think about R=A
5.T; Hard to describe, but we did it in class (at least on Side B...)
6.F; if the points are all collinear, they only define 1 line.
7.F; If P is 12 inches away from l, and a=.01, then there are 0 points on l that are a away from P.
8.F; lines have no midpoints
9.T; Line Postulate
10.T; See Minimal Incidence Postulate
11.F; Plane Postulate
12.T; Theorem 1-2
13.F; Noncoplanar lines (skew lines) determine no planes
14.????? I'll ask Dr. Hahn
15.F; Think of the Pontiac symbol
16.T; Def'n Convex polygon, Def'n Δ
17.????? I'll ask Dr. Hahn
18.F; a ray will not divide a plane (only a line can)
19.T; No idea what theorem/postulate/definition, suggestion is necessary/helpful
20.????? I'll ask Dr. Hahn
21.????? I'll ask Dr. Hahn
22.T; they must form a triangle for it to work
23.F; this is an extension of 22, from 2D to 3D
24.????? I'll ask Dr. Hahn
25.T; since an angle is 2 rays with a common end point, you get 3 points, determining at least 1 plane
26.T; think parallel lines
27.F; angles w/ measure >90
28.T; Supplementary has no restriction on position, and by def'n supplementary and protractor postulate
29.T; I think it was some theoremcitation needed but, Def'n Supplementary, Def'n congruent angles
30.F; mΘA = mΘB, but ΘΑ does not necessarily equal ΘB.
31.F; ΔABC Ψ ΔMNL (rather than ΔLMN)
32.T; it's possible (if I=X and N=S)
33.F; AAA doesn't work (draw a big eq. Δ and a small eq.Δ)
34.F; by def'n cong. Δ's.
35.T; SAS
36.F; AAS means in that order, so an angle, an angle, and a side, and ASA means the side must be included between the two angles.
37.T; Def'n Δ
38.F; think about true biconditionals
39.T; Obviously.
40.F; I can't draw it here, but if the three angles never intersect
41.T; It's why we can get corollary 1&2 of IΔT and corollary of C-IΔT
42.F; what if C=B
43.T; Def'n Angle bisector
44.F; Think about a straight angle
45.F; 7=5+2 is not a statement (I looked it up in my Humphries notes)
46.T; Look up the supplement theorem
47.T; Since they are the same segments, the endpoints must be the same ( but order doesn't mattter)
48.T; SSS
49.T; SAS
50.F; SSA doesn't always work
51.T; ASA
52.T; AAS
53.F; see 33
54.F; Triangles don't have angle bisectors; unless Dr. Hahn means the “angle bisector of an angle of a triangle”
55.F; ABCD could be a rhombus
56.T; The median of an equilateral triangle
57.F; you have to use 6-2 to get that
58.F; That it has 2 congruent sides can also make it isosceles
59.T; they're logically equivalent (it's how proof by contrapositive works)
60.F; it's just a bisector, not necessarily a perpendicular one
61.F; l can be perpendicular to m
62.F; if A=I, then line AI doesn't exist, since you need 2 points for a line
63.T; Ruler Postulate states that d(a,b)=|a-b|
64.F; Ruler Postulate
65.T; Ruler Postulate
66.F; Minimal Incidence Postulate says that you need 4 noncoplanar points to determine space
67.T; hard to show, but l splits α (the plane) into 2 half-planes. m splits those half-planes into quarter-planes (as long as it intersects l) and thus there are 4 regions
68.F; If A, B, and C are noncollinear
69.F; you can have a different eye color than yourself
70.T; the opposite is the ray that forms a line with the other ray, so if ray AB and ray AC are opposites, they only have A in common, which is 1 point.
71.F; Supplementary puts no restriction on location.
72.????? I'll ask Dr. Hahn
73.????? I'll ask Dr. Hahn
74.F; What if B,D, and A are collinear?
75.F; θBOW and θTIE are congruent, but not necessarily the same angle
76.T; Def'n Δ
77.F; SSA doesn't always work
78.T; otherwise SSA would work
79.T; Def'n median
80.F; take the median from a base angle
81.F;They could be collinear
82.F; That's the minimal Incidence Postulate
83.F; only right triangles. In most triangles, it's called “the longest side”
84.T; Def'n median, def'n midpoints
85.T; one means the existence, and exactly means the uniqueness
86.F; The statement must be false, since the statement and its contrapositive are logically equivalent
87.F; make angleAKE obtuse, then draw the altitude KZ. It doesn't make it isosceles
88.F; What if B=D?
89.F; some medians are perpendicular is the negation (please check this one, definitely)
90.F; it's “greater than or equal to”
91.F; what if D is not the midpoint of segmentAC?
jandrews
jandrews

Posts : 4
Join date : 2008-12-13
Age : 30

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  Paul Tue Dec 16, 2008 9:14 am

if youre going to post a review, could you at least make it worth it to look at?
im not certain, but im pretty sure that θ doesn't stand for angle

Paul

Posts : 9
Join date : 2008-12-15
Age : 30

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  luke Tue Dec 16, 2008 9:47 am

did you make these up or are they from tests and quizzes?
luke
luke
Admin

Posts : 61
Join date : 2008-12-08
Age : 30

https://formvreview.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  kruggg Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:07 am

LUke they are (i think) the answers to that giant t/f packet d-hahn gave us
kruggg
kruggg

Posts : 32
Join date : 2008-12-14

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  luke Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:24 am

oh ok
luke
luke
Admin

Posts : 61
Join date : 2008-12-08
Age : 30

https://formvreview.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  jerickson Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:06 am

Actually paul...
The lower-case letter θ is used as a symbol for:

* A plane angle in geometry.

quoted directly from wikipedia
jerickson
jerickson

Posts : 64
Join date : 2008-12-11

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  Paul Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:46 am

yes, but that's not what we're using in class, and therefore doesn't matter

Paul

Posts : 9
Join date : 2008-12-15
Age : 30

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  luke Tue Dec 16, 2008 5:36 pm

that really sucks that you wasted your time making this
luke
luke
Admin

Posts : 61
Join date : 2008-12-08
Age : 30

https://formvreview.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  Ginger Tue Dec 16, 2008 6:10 pm

ok, i know this is stupid, but is anyone gonna print all the theorems and postulates anyways? cause someone stole my book awhile back so i dont have that....and it would help whoever does it aaallllooootttt Razz Cool Sad Very Happy
Ginger
Ginger

Posts : 21
Join date : 2008-12-14

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  japes Tue Dec 16, 2008 6:28 pm

jake, how many important things can you forget/lose. of all subjects to lose your txtbk, math is probably the worst
japes
japes

Posts : 11
Join date : 2008-12-08
Age : 29

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  Stuart Tue Dec 16, 2008 6:34 pm

Do we have to explain for the T and F
Stuart
Stuart

Posts : 13
Join date : 2008-12-13
Age : 30

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  Gunther Tue Dec 16, 2008 6:59 pm

She said we migh have to explain a few, and some we wouldn't.

Gunther

Posts : 28
Join date : 2008-12-13

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  Ginger Tue Dec 16, 2008 7:23 pm

no duh spence, i didnt lose it, some one took it. Andrews, i forgot the sheet dr. hahn gave us so im using yours, i think 61 and 63 are wrong l cant be perpendicular to m and on 63, what if a=b? then its 0, and thats not positive
Ginger
Ginger

Posts : 21
Join date : 2008-12-14

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  jerickson Tue Dec 16, 2008 8:11 pm

well paul, as long as people understand what it means, isn't it ok?
jerickson
jerickson

Posts : 64
Join date : 2008-12-11

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  kruggg Tue Dec 16, 2008 8:54 pm

Ginger wrote:no duh spence, i didnt lose it, some one took it. Andrews, i forgot the sheet dr. hahn gave us so im using yours, i think 61 and 63 are wrong l cant be perpendicular to m and on 63, what if a=b? then its 0, and thats not positive

Way to blame your problems on other people Jake, typical
kruggg
kruggg

Posts : 32
Join date : 2008-12-14

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  Ginger Tue Dec 16, 2008 9:05 pm

way to type something relevant alex
Ginger
Ginger

Posts : 21
Join date : 2008-12-14

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  jandrews Wed Dec 17, 2008 3:44 pm

Paul wrote:if youre going to post a review, could you at least make it worth it to look at?
im not certain, but im pretty sure that θ doesn't stand for angle

Actually, Paul, theta is the common use of angles in physics. Don't you remember from vectors (R, theta)? Oh, that's right, you're too impressive to remember. I mean, UNimpressive
jandrews
jandrews

Posts : 4
Join date : 2008-12-13
Age : 30

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  jerickson Wed Dec 17, 2008 4:34 pm

thats exactly what i said...
jerickson
jerickson

Posts : 64
Join date : 2008-12-11

Back to top Go down

Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review Empty Re: Andrews-Matoka Geometry Review

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum