Georgia is justifying the SSS triangle congruence criteria using △ABC and △LMN (image 1). She transforms the first triangle with a translation to create △A′B′C′ (image 2), followed by a rotation to create △A"B"C" (image 3). She is surprised to see that △A"B"C" overlaps △LMN without having done a reflection. What happened? (1 point) Responses Georgia has shown that the two triangles are congruent. Sometimes three transformations are not necessary when mapping one triangle onto another triangle. Georgia has shown that the two triangles are congruent. Sometimes three transformations are not necessary when mapping one triangle onto another triangle. Georgia made a mistake. She should have done a reflection before the rotation so that her sequence of transformations included all three types of transformations. Georgia made a mistake. She should have done a reflection before the rotation so that her sequence of transformations included all three types of transformations. Georgia has shown that the two triangles are not congruent. If the sequence of transformations does not include a translation, rotation, and reflection, then the triangles cannot be congruent. Georgia has shown that the two triangles are not congruent. If the sequence of transformations does not include a translation, rotation, and reflection, then the triangles cannot be congruent. Georgia made a mistake. She should have translated △ABC along the vector that takes point B to point N, then done a reflection, then done a rotation.

asked by 3) Chopping firewood Physical change Chemical

3 months ago

109 views

0

0

1 answer

The correct response based on the scenario described is:

Georgia has shown that the two triangles are congruent. Sometimes three transformations are not necessary when mapping one triangle onto another triangle.

Transformations like translation and rotation preserve congruence, and it's possible for triangles to overlap without needing a reflection, particularly if they are oriented in the same direction after the transformations. Therefore, the lack of a reflection does not invalidate the congruence between the triangles.

answered by GPT-4o mini

0

0

Ask a New Question or answer this question.

Question

Georgia is justifying the SSS triangle congruence criteria using △ABC and △LMN (image 1). She transforms the first triangle with a translation to create △A′B′C′ (image 2), followed by a rotation to create △A"B"C" (image 3). She is surprised to see that △A"B"C" overlaps △LMN without having done a reflection. What happened? (1 point) Responses Georgia has shown that the two triangles are congruent. Sometimes three transformations are not necessary when mapping one triangle onto another triangle. Georgia has shown that the two triangles are congruent. Sometimes three transformations are not necessary when mapping one triangle onto another triangle. Georgia made a mistake. She should have done a reflection before the rotation so that her sequence of transformations included all three types of transformations. Georgia made a mistake. She should have done a reflection before the rotation so that her sequence of transformations included all three types of transformations. Georgia has shown that the two triangles are not congruent. If the sequence of transformations does not include a translation, rotation, and reflection, then the triangles cannot be congruent. Georgia has shown that the two triangles are not congruent. If the sequence of transformations does not include a translation, rotation, and reflection, then the triangles cannot be congruent. Georgia made a mistake. She should have translated △ABC along the vector that takes point B to point N, then done a reflection, then done a rotation.

1 answer

The correct response based on the scenario described is:

Georgia has shown that the two triangles are congruent. Sometimes three transformations are not necessary when mapping one triangle onto another triangle.

Transformations like translation and rotation preserve congruence, and it's possible for triangles to overlap without needing a reflection, particularly if they are oriented in the same direction after the transformations. Therefore, the lack of a reflection does not invalidate the congruence between the triangles.

Ask a New Question or answer this question.

GPT-4o mini · Answer

The correct response based on the scenario described is:

Georgia has shown that the two triangles are congruent. Sometimes three transformations are not necessary when mapping one triangle onto another triangle.

Transformations like translation and rotation preserve congruence, and it's possible for triangles to overlap without needing a reflection, particularly if they are oriented in the same direction after the transformations. Therefore, the lack of a reflection does not invalidate the congruence between the triangles.