Someone help it would be very much appreciated:,)

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?

You invested $5000 between two accounts paying 4% and 9% annual interest, respectively. if the total interest earned for theyear was $350, how much was invested at each rate? $was invested at 4% andwas invested at 9%.

He weights of 2-pound bags of best dog food are approximately normally distributed with a given mean  and standard deviation  according to the empirical rule, what percentage of the bags will have weights within 3 standard deviations of the mean? 47.5%68%95%99.7%