carlos says that the xyz is not congruent to pqr because there is no ssa theorem or postulate.
in two or more complete sentences, explain why or why not carlos is correct. justify your answer using triangle congruency postulates, theorems, and definitions.

Step-by-step explanation:

Carlos is correct. Since the angles P and X are not included between PQ and RQ and XY and YZ, the SAS postulate cannot be used, since it states that the angle must be included between the sides. Unlike with ASA, where there is the AAS theorem for non-included sides, there is not SSA theorem for non-included angles, so the triangles cannot be proven to be congruent.

the correct answer to your question is a. 4^4

good luck my friend!

hope this !

maybe if i you could me by giving me brainliest?

! < 3

have a splendid day < 3 : )