Does anybody want to help me new question and statement you could go to the statement but can you go to the question too northc04

Here is their argument. given the obtuse angle x, we make a quadrilateral abcd with ∠dab = x, and ∠abc = 90◦, and ad = bc. say the perpendicular bisector to dc meets the perpendicular bisector to ab at p. then pa = pb and pc = pd. so the triangles pad and pbc have equal sides and are congruent. thus ∠pad = ∠pbc. but pab is isosceles, hence ∠pab = ∠pba. subtracting, gives x = ∠pad−∠pab = ∠pbc −∠pba = 90◦. this is a preposterous conclusion – just where is the mistake in the "proof" and why does the argument break down there?

Iam trying to solve a linear equation for the shoe size of someone 84" tall taking into consideration example 1 is 69" tall with a shoe size of 9 and example 2 is 72 inches tall with a shoe size of 11. i understand that the equation should be y=mx+b and that on the graph the answer is (3,2) but i just don't understand how to create the equation to solve for 84-inches and 60-inches tall questions. after two days, i need .

Asays "we are both knaves" and b says nothing. exercises 24–31 relate to inhabitants of an island on which there are three kinds of people: knights who always tell the truth, knaves who always lie, and spies (called normals by smullyan [sm78]) who can either lie or tell the truth. you encounter three people, a, b, and c. you know one of these people is a knight, one is a knave, and one is a spy. each of the three people knows the type of person each of other two is. for each of these situations, if possible, determine whether there is a unique solution and determine who the knave, knight, and spy are. when there is no unique solution, list all possible solutions or state that there are no solutions. 24. a says "c is the knave," b says, "a is the knight," and c says "i am the spy."