During a huge snowstorm in the white mountains last year is snowed 300 cm in one week how much did it's no in meters

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?

The cross-sectional areas of a right triangular prism and a right cylinder are congruent. the right triangular prism has a height of 6 units, and the right cylinder has a height of 6 units. which conclusion can be made from the given information? the volume of the triangular prism is half the volume of the cylinder. the volume of the triangular prism is twice the volume of the cylinder. the volume of the triangular prism is equal to the volume of the cylinder. the volume of the triangular prism is not equal to the volume of the cylinder.

What else equals 42 and 30 for multiply