To the nearest foot, what is the radius of the ferris wheel if you traveled 157 feet?

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?

‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️ i have been waiting for almost an hour with no ! only answer if you absolutely know the ! explain your answer and ensure that it is you so so much!

In exponential growth functions, the base of the exponent must be greater than 1,how would the function change if the base of the exponent were 1? how would the fiction change if the base of the exponent were between 0and 1