Question

2 which reason is missing from the 2 - column proof that δk h g ≅ δk h j? statements: ∠g k h ≅ ∠j k h (given), k h ≅ k h (?), ∠g h k ≅ ∠j h k (right angles are congruent), δk h g ≅ δk h j (asa congruence postulate). options: congruent lines, given, sss congruence postulate, reflexive property.

Explanation:

To determine the missing reason for \( KH \cong KH \), we analyze the property: a segment is congruent to itself, which is the reflexive property of congruence. Let's check the options:

• "Congruent lines" is not a standard reason for a segment being congruent to itself.
• "Given" would mean this was stated as given, but \( KH \cong KH \) is a self - congruence, not typically given.
• "SSS Congruence Postulate" is for three sides of triangles, not for a single segment's self - congruence.
• "Reflexive property" states that any geometric figure is congruent to itself, so this applies to \( KH \cong KH \).

Answer:

Reflexive property