Which best explains whether or not triangles rst and acb are congruent? the figures are congruent. δrst can be mapped to δacb by a reflection over the x-axis and a translation 2 units to the left. the figures are congruent. δrst can be mapped to δacb by a reflection over the y-axis and a translation 2 units down. the figures are not congruent. point r corresponds to point a, but s corresponds to b and t corresponds to c. the figures are not congruent. point r does not correspond with point a.

The answer is A, just took the test.

A was the only obvious choice because a reflection across the x-axis will get triangle ACB to triangle RST. I second guessed this answer because sliding triangle ACB two units to the left would not map these two triangle directly on top of each other, but it will if u translate triangle ACB two units to the left before reflecting across the x-axis.

The statement that best explains whether or not triangles RST and ACB are congruent is (a)  ΔRST can be mapped to ΔACB by a reflection over the x-axis and a translation 2 units to the left.

From the figure (see attachment), we understand that the triangles are congruent.

This means that, options (c) and (d) are not possible

Also, option (b) is not possible

This so because, a reflection over the y-axis would not map both figures

Hence, the true statement is (a)

This is so because, when ΔRST is reflected over the x-axis, and then translated left by 2 units, the resulting shape is ΔACB

Read more about transformation at:

link

answer: the answer is one

step-by-step explanation:

pemdas, in this situation there is no parenthesis or exponents so you go to multiplication, 1x1=1, then division 1/1= 1 then addition 1+1=2 then subtraction 2-1=1

false

step-by-step explanation:

the meaning of changing is to edit or make something different.

but transmitting means cause (something) to pass on from one place or person to another.

there 2 different things