Sarkis wants to draw a triangle with sides measuring 4 ft, 10 ft, and 16 ft. Which is true about Sarkis’s plan? Sarkis cannot draw a triangle with these side lengths. Sarkis can only draw one unique triangle with these side lengths. Sarkis can draw exactly two triangles with these side lengths. Sarkis can draw more than one triangle with these side lengths.

She can't draw a triangle.

Step-by-step explanation:

Its impossible with the 4ft measurement.

That is all you can answer. Hop this helps!

SHE CANNOT pls mark brainleist

Step-by-step explanation:

If you use the Triangle Inequality Theorem, you will find that 4+10 equals 14, which is less than 16. It has to be greater than 16 to be a triangle.

answer:   segregation violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment, which holds that no state can “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

details/explanation:

brown v. board of education of topeka, decided by the us supreme court in 1954, ruled that all americans are entitled to the same civil liberties and protections in regard to access to education. until that decision, it was legal to segregate schools according to race, so that black students could not attend the same schools as white students.   an older supreme court decision, plessy v. ferguson (1896), had said that separate, segregated public facilities were acceptable as long as the facilities offered were equal in quality.   in the case of brown v. board of education, that standard was challenged and defeated.   segregation was shown to create inequality, and the supreme court unanimously ruled segregation to be unconstitutional.

the ruling was important in advancing civil rights because it affirmed that the 14th amendment applies to all rights and privileges of citizens, including access to   education.   this was being violated by states whose laws supported the segregation of schools.   section 1 of the 14th amendment reads as follows:

∠1≅∠2 by the alternate exterior angles theorem.

step-by-step explanation:

given, a ∥ b and ∠1 ≅ ∠3 .we have to prove that e ∥ f

we know that ∠1≅∠3 and that a || b because they are given. we see that by the alternate exterior angles theorem. therefore, ∠2≅∠3 by the transitive property. so, we can conclude that e || f by the converse alternate exterior angles theorem.

we have to fill the missing statement.

transitivity property states that if a = b and b = c, then a = c.

now, given ∠1≅∠3 and by transitivity property ∠2≅∠3 .

hence, to apply transitivity property one angle must be common which is not in result after applying this property which is ∠1.

the only options in which ∠1 is present are ∠1 and ∠2, ∠1 and ∠4

∠1 and ∠4 is not possible ∵ after applying transitivity we didn't get ∠4.

hence, the missing statement is ∠1≅∠2.

so, ∠1≅∠2 by the alternate exterior angles theorem.