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 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. Georgia made a mistake. She should have translated triangle upper A upper B upper C along the vector that takes point upper B to point upper N , then done a reflection, then done a rotation. 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 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 done a reflection before the rotation so that her sequence of transformations included all three types of transformations.

Answer 1

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

In this case, the translation and rotation that Georgia applied to triangle △ABC were sufficient to overlay it onto triangle △LMN without the need for a reflection, demonstrating that the two triangles are indeed congruent.

Answer 2

thats wrong

Answer 3

I apologize for any confusion. Let's carefully consider the scenario.

If Georgia transformed triangle △ABC into triangle △A"B"C" through a translation and a rotation, and found that △A"B"C" overlaps with △LMN, it indicates that the triangles are indeed congruent, but the sequence of transformations applied does not necessarily have to include a reflection.

Thus, the most accurate response would be:

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

If this was marked incorrect, it's possible that specific criteria or detail in the problem were not addressed. If you can provide any additional context or constraints related to the transformations, I would be happy to reassess the situation further.

Answer 4

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 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. Georgia made a mistake. She should have translated triangle upper A upper B upper C along the vector that takes point upper B to point upper N , then done a reflection, then done a rotation. 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 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 done a reflection before the rotation so that her sequence of transformations included all three types of transformations.

Answer 5

Given your clarification, let’s analyze the situation involving the triangle transformations again.

Georgia translated triangle △ABC to form triangle △A′B′C′ and then rotated it to form triangle △A"B"C". If triangle △A"B"C" overlaps with triangle △LMN without needing a reflection, this indicates that the triangles are still congruent through the performed transformations.

The key points in this situation are:

• The sequence of transformations can sometimes be shorter than three if the triangles overlap correctly.
• The congruence of the triangles is maintained regardless of whether a reflection was necessary in this specific case.

Therefore, the correct response would be:

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

If there was a misunderstanding or if this was still deemed incorrect, it's important to consider what specific aspects of the transformations were being examined. Based on the information provided, that conclusion aligns best with the principles of triangle congruence via transformations.