A group of students was discussing the meaning of this statement. They were arguing back and forward about whether the converse of the statement is also true. Jahmiah, the leader of the group, determined that the converse is not true.

The statement is missing. The statement is -- "A ray can be part of a line."

The answer is : The converse is not true, so Jahmiah is correct.

Step-by-step explanation:

A conditional statement is represented by showing p → q. It means if p is correct or true,  then q is also correct or true.

And the converse of p → q can be shown as  q → p.

But we know that the converse of a statement is not always true, it may be true and may not be true.

In the context, the statement is " a ray can be a part of a line." And so the converse would be  "A line can be a part of the ray".

So by definition we know that a line is continuous line having no end points, it extends in one direction. While a ray starts from a point and extends to infinity in one direction.

Thus ray is part of line but line is not a part of the ray. So the converse of the statement is not correct.

Hence, Jahmiah is correct.

x=6 and x=3

beep beep imma sheep