If we let  and  be the sidelengths of  and , respectively; the statements can be rewritten as:

Statement 1: 

Statement 2: 

Since the area of an equilateral triangle is dependent solely upon the length of each side, comparison of the lengths of the sides is all that is necessary to determine which triangle, has the greater area. The question can therefore be reduced to asking which of  and , if either, is greater.

Statement 1 alone is not sufficient to yield an answer, as we see by examining these two scenarios:

Case 1: 

Case 2: 

Both cases satisfy Statement 1, but in the first case, , meaning that  has greater sidelength and area than , and in the second case, , meaning the reverse. By a similar argument, Statement 2 is insufficient.

Now assume both statements to be true. The two equations together comprise a system of equations:

Multiply the second equation by  and add to the first:

Now substitute back:

The sidelengths are the same, and, consequently, so are the areas of the triangles.

Since the area of an equilateral triangle is solely dependent on the length of one side, it follows that the triangle with the greater sidelength has the greater area.

Statement 1 alone gives that the length of one side of  is greater than that on one side of .It follows that  has the greater area.

Statement 2 alone gives that , from which it follows that

and 

.

Again, this shows that  has the greater sidelength and the greater area.

Assume Statement 1 alone. To find the diameter of a circle with circumference , divide the circumference by  to get . This is also the length of each side of the triangle, so we can get the area using the area formula:

.

Assume Statement 2 alone. A 45-45-90 Triangle has congruent legs, and the area is half the product of their lengths, so if we let  be the common sidelength,

By the 45-45-90 Theorem, the hypotenuse has length  times this, or .

Since it is not given whether  is a leg or the hypotenuse of a right triangle, however, the length of  - and consequently, the area - is not clear.

In an equilateral triangle all sides are of the same length and all internal angles measure to . 

Statement 1: 

Where  represents the length of the side.

If we're given the side, we can calculate the area:

Statement 2: We don't need the angle to find the area.

Since is states that we are working with a equilateral triangle we can use the formula for area:

 where  is the side length. Once we have calculated the side length we can then plug that value along with the area into the equation:

 and solve for h.

Consider that equilateral triangles have equal sides. This means we can make ABC into two smaller triangles with hypotenuse of 13 and base of 6.5. We can use that to find the height. We can find the height using statement II.

Therefore, both statements alone are sufficient to solve the question.

Firslty, we would need to have the length of the other sides of the triangles to calculate the height. Information about the angles could also be able to see whether the triangle is a special triangle.

From statement one we can say that triangle ABC is an equilateral triangle, since D is the mid point of the the basis. Moreover knowing , we can see that angle  is 60 degrees. Since D, the basis of the height is the midpoint it follows that  is also 60 degrees. Therefore  is also 60 degrees. Hence the triangle is equilateral. However, we don't know the length of any of the side.

Statement 2 gives us the piece of missing information. And alone statement 2 doesn't help us find the height.

It follows that both statements together are sufficient.

To be able to answer the question, we would need information about the radius or about the sides of the triangle.

Statement 1 tells us that the center of the circle is at   of the vertice. However this is a property and it will be the same in any equilateral triangle inscribed in a circle, indeed, the heights, whose intersection is the center of gravity, all intersect at  of the vertices.

Statement 2 also tells us something that we could have known from the properties of equilateral triangles. Indeed, equilateral triangles have all their 3 angles equal to .

Even by taking both statements together, we can't tell anything about the lengths of the height. Therefore the statements are insufficient.

I) Gives us the length of side w. Since this is an equilateral triangle, we really are given all three sides. From here we can break WHY into two smaller triangles and use either Pythagorean Theorem (or 30/60/90 triangle ratios) to find the height.

II) Gives us the area of WHY. If we recognize the fact that we can make two smaller 30/60/90 triangles from WHY, then we can make an equation with one variable to find the height.

Solve the following for b:

Thus, either statement is sufficient to answer the question.

From either statement alone, it is possible to find the length of one side of ; from Statement 1 alone, the perimeter 36 can be divided by 3 to yield side length 12, and from Statement 2 alone, the area formula for an equilateral triangle can be applied as follows:

Once this is found, the length of altitude  can be found by noting that this divides the triangle into two congruent 30-60-90 triangles and by applying the 30-60-90 Theorem:

and

Assume Statement 1 alone. If altitude  of  is constructed, the right triangle  is constructed as a consequence.  is a leg and  the hypotenuse of , so . Since by Statement 1, it is given that , then by substitution, , so  is the longer altitude.

Assume Statement 2 alone. 

, so

 divides  into two 30-60-90 triangles, one of which is  with shorter leg  and hypotenuse , so by the 30-60-90 Theorem, 

Again,  and  is the longer altitude.