Carlos says that the xyz is not congruent to pqr because there is no ssa theorem or postulate. in two or more complete sentences, explain why or why not carlos is correct. justify your answer using triangle congruency postulates, theorems, and definitions.

He is correct because he used the congruence postulates, theorems correctly.

(2,9)

i think thats the answer i checked it on google

option a.

step-by-step explanation:

if you look closely at the graph, we can notice that the function is not defined at two different points.

if you look at functions b and c, you will notice that both functions are not defined at just one point. the function b is not defined at x= -5/2 and function c is not defined at x=-5. both options are discarded, given that our function should not be defined at two fiferent points.

now, if you look closely at the graph you will notice that the function sketched is not defined at x=5 and x=-2.