Question

Nina made two errors in the proof. the first error she made was putting step 3 before step 4, 5, 6. i also got confused at this. saying ∠leo ≅ ∠neo is jumping to the final statement without smaller statements ultimately explaining it. steps 4 and 5 state what the degrees of angles ∠leo and ∠neo are, 90º. then, step 6 explains that since these angles are the same, each segment beside the bisector is congruent. the correct order of the steps should go from, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, to 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 3, 7, and 8. the second error nina made was saying in step 7's reason, it was because of the sas postulate. this is incorrect. we know these triangles are congruent because of the asa postulate. in triangle δole, l and e are the angles while oe is the side. in triangle, δone, n and e are the angles, while oe is also the side. basically, since there are two equal angles between the two triangles and one equal side, they are congruent because of the asa postulate not the sas postulate.

Answer 1

The question is about errors in a proof involving angles and congruent segments. The errors made by Nina are explained, along with the correct order of steps and the correct postulate for the congruence of the triangles.

Step-by-step explanation:

The question is about errors in a proof involving angles and congruent segments. The first error made by Nina was putting step 3 before steps 4, 5, and 6. This error confused the student as well. The correct order of the steps should be 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 3, 7, and 8. The second error made by Nina was stating in step 7 that the triangles were congruent due to the SAS postulate, when in fact they were congruent due to the ASA postulate. The explanation provided clarifies the reasons for congruence using angles and sides.

The reason for the congruence of triangles should be the ASA (Angle-Side-Angle) postulate, not the SAS (Side-Angle-Side) postulate. This is because you have two equal angles and one equal side between the two triangles.