I retired From teaching geometry ten years ago and I see the need for substitute teachers is great so I’m going to be a sub. In preparation for going back I decided to brush up on my skills. Your geometry tutorials are the first I’ve checked out and your presentation is excellent. You are clear, concise and pleasant to follow. I’ll be watching all your videos. Thank you for what you have done and I’m excited to return to the classroom
thank u so much ur actually so helpful i dont understand how my geometry teacher teaches and you just explain it all so well thank u very much mario u are amazing
Check out my reasonably priced algebra 2/college algebra course for sale which also covers various trigonometry concepts. mariosmathtutoring.teachable.com/p/algebra-2-video-course
I will first say that your videos are excellent. I am 35 and am using your videos to review/relearn geometry, mainly for proof writing. They are the best geometry videos I have come across. I did have a question though, I was curious about using the converse of a theorem to prove something. As you mentioned in lesson #2, not all converse statements are necessarily true. And not all converse geometric theorems are true. So wouldn't it be better to think of it as if a theorem is a biconditional, then it is ok to use its converse for a proof? I was just a little confused when to accept that assumption. Should it only be used on theorems when it is explicitly given?
If the lines are not parallel then the consecutive interior angles will not be supplementary …only if the lines are parallel will they be supplementary
If you notice, it's half a parallelogram. The total sum of angles in a parallelogram is 360 degrees. Since it's half a parallelogram with 2 angles and not a full one with 4 angles, the total sum of angle is going to be 180 instead of 360. so 1 and 2 adds up to 180 degrees. And since 1 was 110 degrees, 2 is 70 degrees. 110 + angle 2 = 180. angle 2 = 180-110. therefore, angle 2 is 70 degrees.
I retired From teaching geometry ten years ago and I see the need for substitute teachers is great so I’m going to be a sub.
In preparation for going back I decided to brush up on my skills.
Your geometry tutorials are the first I’ve checked out and your presentation is excellent. You are clear, concise and pleasant to follow. I’ll be watching all your videos.
Thank you for what you have done and I’m excited to return to the classroom
Glad to hear it Creig. Good luck to you!
Did geometry a year and a half ago but not from school. My tutor rushed through it and this was very helpful. Thank you!
Glad it helped!
I'm really enjoying this series so far!
Thank you, the work you do is amazing
thank u so much ur actually so helpful i dont understand how my geometry teacher teaches and you just explain it all so well thank u very much mario u are amazing
You are so welcome!
Thank you. I love your tutors. Its so helpful. Thank you so much
You are so welcome!
Wish I saw this sooner I failed the geometry June regents and I have to retake it tomorrow wish me luck tyyy
Good luck.
Great course!! I love it is there the same for TRIG?
Check out my reasonably priced algebra 2/college algebra course for sale which also covers various trigonometry concepts.
mariosmathtutoring.teachable.com/p/algebra-2-video-course
I will first say that your videos are excellent. I am 35 and am using your videos to review/relearn geometry, mainly for proof writing. They are the best geometry videos I have come across. I did have a question though, I was curious about using the converse of a theorem to prove something. As you mentioned in lesson #2, not all converse statements are necessarily true. And not all converse geometric theorems are true. So wouldn't it be better to think of it as if a theorem is a biconditional, then it is ok to use its converse for a proof? I was just a little confused when to accept that assumption. Should it only be used on theorems when it is explicitly given?
Fortunately or Unfortunately the converse is not always true.
Should I memorize the theorems?
Yes
@@MariosMathTutoring Okay! Thank you!
I can't thank you enough
when the 2 lines arent parallel, are the consecutive interiors also supplementary?
If the lines are not parallel then the consecutive interior angles will not be supplementary …only if the lines are parallel will they be supplementary
4:46 sir how the other angle is 70°
subtract 110° from 180° 👍
If you notice, it's half a parallelogram. The total sum of angles in a parallelogram is 360 degrees. Since it's half a parallelogram with 2 angles and not a full one with 4 angles, the total sum of angle is going to be 180 instead of 360. so 1 and 2 adds up to 180 degrees. And since 1 was 110 degrees, 2 is 70 degrees. 110 + angle 2 = 180. angle 2 = 180-110. therefore, angle 2 is 70 degrees.
Thanks man
1st comment