Nessa proved that these triangles are congruent using ASA. Roberto proved that they are congruent using AAS. Which statement and reason would be included in Roberto’s proof that was not included in Nessa’s proof? Given: AngleB ≅ AngleN; BC ≅ NM; AngleC is right; AngleM is right
Prove: TriangleABC ≅ TriangleQNM

AngleA ≅ AngleQ because of the third angle theorem.
AB ≅ QN because they are both opposite a right angle.
BC ≅ NM because it is given.
AngleC ≅ AngleM because right angles are congruent.

∠1≅∠2 by the alternate exterior angles theorem.

step-by-step explanation:

given, a ∥ b and ∠1 ≅ ∠3 .we have to prove that e ∥ f

we know that ∠1≅∠3 and that a || b because they are given. we see that by the alternate exterior angles theorem. therefore, ∠2≅∠3 by the transitive property. so, we can conclude that e || f by the converse alternate exterior angles theorem.

we have to fill the missing statement.

transitivity property states that if a = b and b = c, then a = c.

now, given ∠1≅∠3 and by transitivity property ∠2≅∠3 .

hence, to apply transitivity property one angle must be common which is not in result after applying this property which is ∠1.

the only options in which ∠1 is present are ∠1 and ∠2, ∠1 and ∠4

∠1 and ∠4 is not possible ∵ after applying transitivity we didn't get ∠4.

hence, the missing statement is ∠1≅∠2.

so, ∠1≅∠2 by the alternate exterior angles theorem.

is this a dating site too?