Why There Is No SSA Congruence Postulate or TheoremDate: 03/29/2005 at 07:33:19 From: Shahid Subject: Does SSA imply congruence? In the correspondence of two triangles, if SSA = SSA, are the triangles congruent? Is the SSA postulate applicable? I think we use the HS postulate in place of SSA. Date: 03/29/2005 at 14:45:59 From: Doctor Rick Subject: Re: Does SSA imply congruence? Hi, Shahid. There is no general SSA postulate (or theorem). Unlike the familiar congruence theorems, further conditions must be placed on the triangles in order to make a valid theorem. One such condition is the one you mention: if the triangles are right triangles and one of the congruent sides is the hypotenuse of each triangle, then SSA is valid. Here is an example of a pair of triangles in which two sides and a non-included angle are congruent but the triangles are not congruent: C * / | E / | * | / \ | D / \ | * \ | / \ \ | / \ \ | / \ \ | / \ \ | / \ \ | / \\| *---------------------------------------* A B Line BE is perpendicular to AE, and angles EBD and EBC are congruent. The triangles ABC and ABD have the same angle (CAB = DAB), and congruent sides (AB = AB and BC = BD), but obviously they are not congruent. As the statement stands, the implication ("if ... then") is not true: the SSA = SSA condition does not imply congruence of the triangles. Not all pairs of triangles in which SSA = SSA are congruent. - Doctor Rick, The Math Forum http://mathforum.org/dr.math/ |
Search the Dr. Math Library: |
[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]
Ask Dr. Math^{TM}
© 1994-2013 The Math Forum
http://mathforum.org/dr.math/