Emma and Ed walk into a room containing 30 assembled Tworks and enough pieces to assemble 100 more Tworks. A Twork takes eight minutes to assemble and 10 minutes to disassemble. If Emma starts assembling Tworks as Ed begins disassembling the ones that were already made, and they both continue to work until there are exactly 35 assembled Tworks in the room (and no partially assembled or disassembled Tworks), how many minutes will Emma have worked

Based on your experiences so far, which approach to geometry do you prefer?

I think that my preference depends on the situation. Euclidean geometry has a basic understanding that makes easy to deal with common life experiences, while analytical geometry request a though more complex and it is used at its best when it comes to resolving mathematical problems in a geometrical way, like functions. 

Why?

Because they have a basic approach that is completely different. Euclidean geometry is based on shapes and numbers, while analytic geometry is based on the relationship between algebra and geometry. One is nearer the human experiences of everyday life, the other is more abstract and so more useful in other contexts. 

Which approach is easier to extend beyond two dimensions?

Intuitively it is easier to extend beyond two dimensions the euclidian approach. All you have to do is to rotate a shape on one of its bases. On the other hand, once you've grasped the concept behind the analytic geometry, perhaps it is easier in that way as you can refer to a geometrical shape in algebra forms.  

What are some situations in which one approach to geometry would prove more beneficial than the other?

everyday life situations, the first form of teaching geometry, basic understanding, visual media are all situations in which Euclidean approach is the best. Complex situation, architecture, informatics, models of prediction, function study, complex mathematics are instead the situations in which analytic approach works the best. 

Describe the situation and why you think analytical or Euclidean geometry is more applicable.

The first form of teaching geometry comes from the recognition of shapes and forms, and it is a concrete subject that could be done with concrete examples. On the other hand, analytic geometry revolves around abstract concepts that should have a solid base before being approached as otherwise, they're not understandable, and so they are used in complex models and mathematics.