Micheal and derrick each completed a separate proof to show that corresponding angles AKG and ELK are congruent. who completed the proof incorrectly? explain

where are the options?

step-by-step explanation:

any options?

step-by-step explanation:

step-by-step explanation:

we can use this expression to calculate the energy gain as a particle moves with a field or the energy loss as it moves against it. (note that it is also used to define the electron-volt, a unit of energy equal to that gained by an electron as it falls through a pd of 1 v, i.e. w = 1 ev = 1.6 10-19 c 1 v = 1.6 10-19j).in fact this expression is really nothing more than the statement that potential is the potential energy per unit charge. in this case, v= w/qis simply stating that the change in potential energy(or work done) per unit charge is equal to the change in potential (or potential difference), v.student questions: uniform electric fields2electron beamcathode+5 kvanode0 v

80 the answer is 80

step-by-step explanation: