Complete the explanation of whether Julie's equation is sense or nonsense, and if you think the sche Property works for subtraction

8 2/3 is the answer

step-by-step explanation: just use a calculator

answer: sine

step-by-step explanation:

the smallest possible measurement of the width is 14 feet

step-by-step explanation:

let's assume length of parallelogram is 'l'

width of parallelogram is 'w'

the perimeter of a parallelogram must be no less than 40 feet

so, we get

we are given

length of parallelogram is 6 feet

so,

l=6

we can plug it

now, we can solve for w

subtract both sides by 12

divide both sides by 2

and we get

so,

the smallest possible measurement of the width is 14 feet

< xcy ≅ < xby

step-by-step explanation:

in δcax and δbax,

so, δcax ≅ δbax (side-angle-side or sas)

since δcax ≅ δbax, we can conclude < acx ≅ < abx

in δacy and δaby,

so, δacy ≅ δaby (side-angle-side or sas)

since δacy ≅ δaby, we can conclude < acy ≅ < aby

now,

< acy ≅ < aby

=> < acx + < xcy ≅ < abx + < xby

=> < acx + < xcy ≅ < acx + < xby   (since < acx ≅ < abx already proved above)

subtracting < acx from both sides, we get

< acx + < xcy -< acx ≅ < acx + < xby -< acx

cancelling out < acx and -< acx from both sides, we get

< xcy ≅ < xby (proved)