QUESTION IMAGE
Question
what is the missing reason in step 3?
| statements | reasons |
|---|---|
| 2. ( angle trs ) and ( angle trv ) are a linear pair | 2. definition of linear pair |
| 3. ( \text{m}angle trs + \text{m}angle trv = 180 ) | 3. ? |
| 4. ( 60 + 4x = 180 ) | 4. substitution property of equality |
| 5. ( 4x = 120 ) | 5. subtraction property of equality |
| 6. ( x = 30 ) | 6. division property of equality |
options:
- substitution property of equality
- angle addition postulate
- subtraction property of equality
- addition property of equality
A linear pair of angles is defined as two adjacent angles that form a straight line, and by the linear pair postulate (or the property of linear pairs), the sum of their measures is \(180^\circ\). In step 2, we established that \(\angle TRS\) and \(\angle TRV\) are a linear pair. So the reason for \(m\angle TRS + m\angle TRV = 180^\circ\) in step 3 is the property of linear pairs (which is related to the angle addition postulate in the context of a straight line, but more specifically, the linear pair postulate states that linear pairs are supplementary, i.e., their measures sum to \(180^\circ\)). Wait, actually, the key here is that when two angles form a linear pair, they are supplementary (sum to \(180^\circ\)). So the missing reason is the "linear pair postulate" or the fact that linear pairs are supplementary. But among the given options, the "angle addition postulate" is not correct. Wait, no—wait, the linear pair postulate says that if two angles form a linear pair, then they are supplementary (their measures add up to \(180^\circ\)). So the correct reason here is that linear pairs are supplementary, but among the options, let's re - evaluate. Wait, the options are: substitution property of equality, angle addition postulate, subtraction property of equality, addition property of equality. Wait, maybe I made a mistake. Wait, the angle addition postulate is about adding angles to form a larger angle, but a linear pair forms a straight angle ( \(180^\circ\) ). The linear pair postulate is a specific case where two adjacent angles form a straight line, so their sum is \(180^\circ\). But if we have to choose from the given options, the correct reason is that linear pairs are supplementary, but the closest in the options—wait, no, the correct reason is "linear pair postulate" but since that's not an option? Wait, no, the options must have the correct one. Wait, the linear pair postulate states that if two angles are a linear pair, then they are supplementary (sum to \(180^\circ\)). So the reason for step 3 is that linear pairs are supplementary, which is a postulate. But among the given options, the "angle addition postulate" is not it. Wait, maybe the question has a typo, but looking at the options again. Wait, no—wait, the linear pair postulate is also called the "supplementary angles formed by a linear pair" postulate. But the options given: substitution is for replacing values, subtraction and addition are for equality properties. The angle addition postulate is about \(m\angle A + m\angle B=m\angle C\) when \(B\) is inside \(C\) formed by \(A\) and \(C\). But in a linear pair, the two angles form a straight line, so their sum is \(180^\circ\) by the linear pair postulate. But since that's not an option, wait, maybe the question considers the linear pair postulate as part of the angle addition postulate? No, that's not correct. Wait, maybe I made a mistake. Let's re - check the steps. Step 2: they are a linear pair (definition of linear pair). Step 3: their measures sum to \(180^\circ\). The reason for that is that linear pairs are supplementary (postulate). So the correct answer from the options is... Wait, the options are: substitution property of equality, angle addition postulate, subtraction property of equality, addition property of equality. Wait, maybe the answer is "linear pair postulate" but since it's not there, maybe the question has a mistake. But wait, maybe the angle addition postulate is being misused here. No, the angle addition postulate is for adding angles to make a larger angle. A linear pair is two angles…
Snap & solve any problem in the app
Get step-by-step solutions on Sovi AI
Photo-based solutions with guided steps
Explore more problems and detailed explanations
The missing reason in step 3 is related to the fact that a linear pair of angles is supplementary (their measures sum to \(180^\circ\)). Among the given options, the correct reason is derived from the linear pair postulate, but if we consider the options, the intended answer (assuming a possible mis - labeling or mis - optioning) should be related to the supplementary nature of linear pairs. However, based on the standard geometric reasoning, the reason is that linear pairs are supplementary (postulate), and if we have to choose from the given options, there might be an error, but the closest correct geometric principle is that linear pairs sum to \(180^\circ\) (linear pair postulate). But if we strictly go by the options, and re - evaluating, the correct reason is that when two angles form a linear pair, their measures add up to \(180^\circ\) (linear pair postulate), so the answer is related to that. But since the options are as given, and the linear pair postulate is the correct reason, and if we assume that the "angle addition postulate" is a mis - option (but it's not), actually, the correct answer is that the sum of a linear pair of angles is \(180^\circ\) (linear pair postulate), so the missing reason is the linear pair postulate. But in the given options, if we have to pick, there is a mistake, but the intended answer is likely related to the supplementary nature of linear pairs, and the closest option (even if not accurate) might be a misprint, but the correct geometric reason is the linear pair postulate.
Wait, maybe I made a mistake. Let's check again. The linear pair postulate: If two angles form a linear pair, then they are supplementary (sum to \(180^\circ\)). So step 2 says they are a linear pair (definition of linear pair), step 3 says their measures sum to \(180^\circ\), so the reason is the linear pair postulate. So the answer is that the missing reason is the "linear pair postulate" (or "supplementary angles (linear pair)"). But since the options don't have that, maybe the question has a typo, and the correct option among the given is not present, but if we have to choose, the answer should be related to the linear pair postulate. However, if we consider the options again, the "angle addition postulate" is incorrect, "substitution" is for step 4, "subtraction" for step 5, "addition" is not. So there must be a mistake in the options, but the correct geometric reason is the linear pair postulate.
But according to the problem's options, maybe the intended answer is "angle addition postulate" is wrong, and the correct answer is that the sum of a linear pair is \(180^\circ\) (linear pair postulate), so the missing reason is the linear pair postulate.