Kiselev's Geometry Problem 51












0












$begingroup$


I am going through Kiselev's Geometry, Book I.
I am having trouble with problem 51.
The problem states:




Give an example that disproves the proposition: "If the bisectors of two angles with a common vertex are perpendicular, then the angles are supplementary." Is the converse proposition true?




His definition of a supplementary angle goes as follows:




Two angles [...] are called supplementary if they have one common side, and their remaining two sides form continuations of each other. [...] the sum of two supplementary angles is 180°.




But I cannot see how to disprove that proposition using his definition. Is it something lost in translation or is it something that I am missing?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    0












    $begingroup$


    I am going through Kiselev's Geometry, Book I.
    I am having trouble with problem 51.
    The problem states:




    Give an example that disproves the proposition: "If the bisectors of two angles with a common vertex are perpendicular, then the angles are supplementary." Is the converse proposition true?




    His definition of a supplementary angle goes as follows:




    Two angles [...] are called supplementary if they have one common side, and their remaining two sides form continuations of each other. [...] the sum of two supplementary angles is 180°.




    But I cannot see how to disprove that proposition using his definition. Is it something lost in translation or is it something that I am missing?










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      0












      0








      0





      $begingroup$


      I am going through Kiselev's Geometry, Book I.
      I am having trouble with problem 51.
      The problem states:




      Give an example that disproves the proposition: "If the bisectors of two angles with a common vertex are perpendicular, then the angles are supplementary." Is the converse proposition true?




      His definition of a supplementary angle goes as follows:




      Two angles [...] are called supplementary if they have one common side, and their remaining two sides form continuations of each other. [...] the sum of two supplementary angles is 180°.




      But I cannot see how to disprove that proposition using his definition. Is it something lost in translation or is it something that I am missing?










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      I am going through Kiselev's Geometry, Book I.
      I am having trouble with problem 51.
      The problem states:




      Give an example that disproves the proposition: "If the bisectors of two angles with a common vertex are perpendicular, then the angles are supplementary." Is the converse proposition true?




      His definition of a supplementary angle goes as follows:




      Two angles [...] are called supplementary if they have one common side, and their remaining two sides form continuations of each other. [...] the sum of two supplementary angles is 180°.




      But I cannot see how to disprove that proposition using his definition. Is it something lost in translation or is it something that I am missing?







      geometry euclidean-geometry






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Nov 28 '18 at 18:58









      Júlio CezarJúlio Cezar

      102




      102






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1












          $begingroup$

          Does this picture provide some help?
          enter image description here






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Yes, a lot, actually. I take that the converse proposition would then be "If two angles with a common vertex are supplementary, then the bisectors are perpendicular." and would be true?
            $endgroup$
            – Júlio Cezar
            Nov 28 '18 at 19:19



















          0












          $begingroup$

          Hint: Angles can share a vertex without sharing a side.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3017549%2fkiselevs-geometry-problem-51%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            1












            $begingroup$

            Does this picture provide some help?
            enter image description here






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Yes, a lot, actually. I take that the converse proposition would then be "If two angles with a common vertex are supplementary, then the bisectors are perpendicular." and would be true?
              $endgroup$
              – Júlio Cezar
              Nov 28 '18 at 19:19
















            1












            $begingroup$

            Does this picture provide some help?
            enter image description here






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Yes, a lot, actually. I take that the converse proposition would then be "If two angles with a common vertex are supplementary, then the bisectors are perpendicular." and would be true?
              $endgroup$
              – Júlio Cezar
              Nov 28 '18 at 19:19














            1












            1








            1





            $begingroup$

            Does this picture provide some help?
            enter image description here






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            Does this picture provide some help?
            enter image description here







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Nov 28 '18 at 19:06









            Vasily MitchVasily Mitch

            1,35837




            1,35837












            • $begingroup$
              Yes, a lot, actually. I take that the converse proposition would then be "If two angles with a common vertex are supplementary, then the bisectors are perpendicular." and would be true?
              $endgroup$
              – Júlio Cezar
              Nov 28 '18 at 19:19


















            • $begingroup$
              Yes, a lot, actually. I take that the converse proposition would then be "If two angles with a common vertex are supplementary, then the bisectors are perpendicular." and would be true?
              $endgroup$
              – Júlio Cezar
              Nov 28 '18 at 19:19
















            $begingroup$
            Yes, a lot, actually. I take that the converse proposition would then be "If two angles with a common vertex are supplementary, then the bisectors are perpendicular." and would be true?
            $endgroup$
            – Júlio Cezar
            Nov 28 '18 at 19:19




            $begingroup$
            Yes, a lot, actually. I take that the converse proposition would then be "If two angles with a common vertex are supplementary, then the bisectors are perpendicular." and would be true?
            $endgroup$
            – Júlio Cezar
            Nov 28 '18 at 19:19











            0












            $begingroup$

            Hint: Angles can share a vertex without sharing a side.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$


















              0












              $begingroup$

              Hint: Angles can share a vertex without sharing a side.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$
















                0












                0








                0





                $begingroup$

                Hint: Angles can share a vertex without sharing a side.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$



                Hint: Angles can share a vertex without sharing a side.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Nov 28 '18 at 19:05









                ArthurArthur

                112k7107191




                112k7107191






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3017549%2fkiselevs-geometry-problem-51%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Plaza Victoria

                    In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

                    How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...