Answer:
hello,
Step-by-step explanation:
a)
p(fail)=0.05
p(not fail)=1-0.05=0.95
b)
p(3 fails)=0.05³=0,000125
c)
p(1 or more system not fail)=1-0.05³=0.999875
d)
it increase the security.( here 4/100 for 3 systems)
Answer:
This is a educated guess, but x is 80 and y is 100.
Step-by-step explanation:
My logic here is that the triangles are the same because of all the congruent lines and stuff. But from there, you know that both the right and the left side are 40 degrees. You know the total degree of a triangle is 180 so 180 - 40 - 40 is 100. So the final angle is 100. If you look at x, its on the outside, but on a line. If you can imagine a circle, its half, so its a 180 degrees total. Then its 180 = x + 100. So x is 80. And then by that same logic its y = 100.
4k+mn=n-3
3(4k+mn)= 12k+mn
So, 12k+mn=n
Answer:
There is not enough evidence to support the claim that Alaska had a lower proportion of identity theft than 23%.
Step-by-step explanation:
We are given the following in the question:
Sample size, n = 1432
p = 23% = 0.23
Alpha, α = 0.05
Number of theft complaints , x = 321
First, we design the null and the alternate hypothesis
This is a one-tailed test.
Formula:
Putting the values, we get,
Now, we calculate the p-value from the table.
P-value = 0.298
Since the p-value is greater than the significance level, we fail to reject the null hypothesis and accept the null hypothesis.
Conclusion:
Thus, there is not enough evidence to support the claim that Alaska had a lower proportion of identity theft than 23%.
Hello
<span>2(x-3)+5=4-7(2x-1)
2x-6+5 = 4 -14x+7
2x+14x =6-5+4+7
16x=12
x=12/16
x=(4×3)/(4×4)
x=3/4 (simplified by 4)
answer B</span>