Question 1169770
<font face="Times New Roman" size="+2">


The assertion that *[tex \Large K] is the point *[tex \Large (-1,2)] and *[tex \Large N] is the point *[tex \Large (1,-1)] and the subsequent assertion that the inclination of *[tex \Large \overline{KN}] is zero, are mutually contradictory.  In order for a segment to have an inclination of zero, the *[tex \Large y]-coordinates of the endpoints must be equal.  Now if you meant that the inclination of *[tex \Large \overline{KN}] is *[tex \Large \theta], you should have written: "The inclination of KN is theta".  But I can only go on what you wrote.  Repost this question spelling out things for which you cannot reproduce symbolically in plain text.

																
John
*[tex \LARGE e^{i\pi}\ +\ 1\ =\ 0]
My calculator said it, I believe it, that settles it
*[illustration darwinfish.jpg]

From <https://www.algebra.com/cgi-bin/upload-illustration.mpl> 
I > Ø
*[tex \Large \ \
*[tex \LARGE \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \  
								
{{n}\choose{r}}
</font>