This Blog exists for the collective benefit of all geometry students. While the posts are specific to Mr. Chamberlain's class, any and all "geometricians" are welcome. The more specific your question (including your own attempts to answer it) the better.
For example, Ryan, in #7 they give you two pairs of vertical angles... they want you to write a sentence or two that describes how you would go about proving that <1 is.cong.to <2... otherwise you might be expected to write a formal proof. If you would like to write a formal two-column proof, knock yourself out (I mean that figuratively).
For #7, I would write something like this:
"Well, gosh, since I have two pairs of vertical angles, I know that each pair is congruent within the pairing. If one angle from each pair is congruent to one angle in the other pair, then gee-golly-whiz-boom, all four angles must gotsk to be congruent." (proper grammar is often overrated... itz da maths naledge dat reely kountz).
Posting this saying I am looking! <3 Me -Nora the most awesomest and most fabulous and the absolutly greatest and nicest and bestest and amazingest and wonderful person you will EVER meet. Nora is ETERNAL! (Yeah, if you couldn't tell i'm a bit of a narcissist)
What happens when you infuse Chisu and Moy at a geometry PARTY!...
ReplyDelete#6 on pg [2(4!)+(28/2)] is an epic fail...
What ever shall we do???
First comment!!!!!
Moy & Chisu
I don't understand problems 7-10. What are we supposed 2 do?
ReplyDeleteFirst, use proper grammar.
ReplyDeleteThen, write the "reasons" that you would use to prove it.
Chisu & Moy
For example, Ryan, in #7 they give you two pairs of vertical angles... they want you to write a sentence or two that describes how you would go about proving that <1 is.cong.to <2... otherwise you might be expected to write a formal proof. If you would like to write a formal two-column proof, knock yourself out (I mean that figuratively).
ReplyDeleteFor #7, I would write something like this:
"Well, gosh, since I have two pairs of vertical angles, I know that each pair is congruent within the pairing. If one angle from each pair is congruent to one angle in the other pair, then gee-golly-whiz-boom, all four angles must gotsk to be congruent." (proper grammar is often overrated... itz da maths naledge dat reely kountz).
Mr. C.
Let's get it straight... Is it Chisu & Moy or Moy & Chisu? Inquiring minds want to know (so does Jamie).
ReplyDeleteAwesomeness must be shared. Given
ReplyDeleteAwesome doesn't have an order. Postulate 95-4.3
It doesn't matter. Theorem 23-9.876
Moy & Chisu or Chisu & Moy
Someone call 911... I think Chisu & Moy (aka Nit and Wit) may have overdosed on choc chip cookies and milk this afternoon...
ReplyDeleteAHAHAHAHA..do we have to put theorume 2-7 and 2-8 in our geometry bible..i might halp if i knew how to spell.
ReplyDeleteE-V-E-R-Y theorem goes in the G.B. except the Viotteon Geometry Theorems... they go in the G.R.F. (Geometry Round File)...
ReplyDeleteShould I take it upon myself to write a Math God Odyssey, perhaps unearthing an unexploited wealth of extra credit?
ReplyDelete-Chisu
I suggest a good night's sleep... starting NOW!
ReplyDeletePosting this saying I am looking!
ReplyDelete<3 Me
-Nora the most awesomest and most fabulous and the absolutly greatest and nicest and bestest and amazingest and wonderful person you will EVER meet. Nora is ETERNAL!
(Yeah, if you couldn't tell i'm a bit of a narcissist)
Good luck this morning Nora... we'll miss you... we have a UNIT 2 Test on Monday... so I'd like to have a question or two... yes?
ReplyDelete