Friday, August 13, 2010
Questions 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 by Victor Ang
Based on the above conversation discuss, with examples and justification whether the following statement is justified.
'A square is a rhombus but a rhombus is not a square'.
Ans: A square is a rhombus but a rhombus is not a square. A square is a special type of rhombus, it is a quadrilateral which has all four sides the same length and opposite sides are parallel while it is a polygon with all four sides closed up and each of its four internal angles are right angles. So a square is a type of rhombus just like a banana is a type of fruit.
All the above
A square and a parallelogram are quadrilaterals. They both have four sides.
Opposite sides of a square and a parallelogram are parallel. They have one pair of parallel side if not they are not considered trapezoid any more.
A trapezoid has one pair of parallel sides. A trapezium has only one pair of side which are parallel and the other two are not.
It is a trapezium. The two opposite sides that are not equal are parallel and a pair of opposite angles are supplementary.
I do not agree with the statement. Parallelograms are like a fruit and squares are banana. A banana is a fruit but a fruit is not part of that banana, just like a square is a parallelogram but a parallelogram is not a square.
The reason is that BF and ED are of equal length and are parallel.