A square is reflected across the y -axis, then translated 3 units down to form a second square. Are the two squares congruent, and why?
O They are congruent because a reflection and a translation are both rigid motions.
O They are congruent because neither a reflection nor a translation is a rigid motion.
O They are not congruent because a reflection is not a rigid motion, even though a translation is rigid.
O They are not congruent because a translation is not a rigid motion, even though a rotation is rigid.

here you hope this .

step-by-step explanation:

hypotenuse = √(15² + 8²)

=  √(225 +64)

=  √(289) = 17

sin(x) = cos(y) = 8/17

they are identical so long as you are doing the sine of one angle and the cosine of the only other angle that isn't the right angle.

< xcy ≅ < xby

step-by-step explanation:

in δcax and δbax,

so, δcax ≅ δbax (side-angle-side or sas)

since δcax ≅ δbax, we can conclude < acx ≅ < abx

in δacy and δaby,

so, δacy ≅ δaby (side-angle-side or sas)

since δacy ≅ δaby, we can conclude < acy ≅ < aby

now,

< acy ≅ < aby

=> < acx + < xcy ≅ < abx + < xby

=> < acx + < xcy ≅ < acx + < xby   (since < acx ≅ < abx already proved above)

subtracting < acx from both sides, we get

< acx + < xcy -< acx ≅ < acx + < xby -< acx

cancelling out < acx and -< acx from both sides, we get

< xcy ≅ < xby (proved)

1/8 is left? add a bit more info plz