P = $1000, t = 2 years, r = 0.08. A = 1000(1+0.08(2)) = 1000(1.16) = 1160

A manufacturer reported a sample mean = 22.0 g and a sample standard deviation = 2.5 g based on a sample of 20 of their products

tester [92]

Answer:

$n=(\frac{1.640(2.5)}{2})^2 =4.2 \approx 5$

So the answer for this case would be n=5 rounded up to the nearest integer

Step-by-step explanation:

Previous concepts

A confidence interval is "a range of values that’s likely to include a population value with a certain degree of confidence. It is often expressed a % whereby a population means lies between an upper and lower interval".

The margin of error is the range of values below and above the sample statistic in a confidence interval.

Normal distribution, is a "probability distribution that is symmetric about the mean, showing that data near the mean are more frequent in occurrence than data far from the mean".

$\bar X=22$ represent the sample mean

$\mu$ population mean (variable of interest)

s=2.5 represent the sample standard deviation

n represent the sample size

ME = 2 represent the margin of error accepted

Solution to the problem

The confidence interval for the mean is given by the following formula:

$\bar X \pm t_{\alpha/2}\frac{s}{\sqrt{n}}$ (1)

The margin of error is given by this formula:

$ME=z_{\alpha/2}\frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{n}}$ (2)

And on this case we have that ME =2 and we are interested in order to find the value of n, if we solve n from equation (2) we got:

$n=(\frac{z_{\alpha/2} s}{ME})^2$ (3)

We can use as estimator for the population deviation the sample deviation $\hat \sigma = s$

The critical value for 90% of confidence interval now can be founded using the normal distribution. And in excel we can use this formla to find it:"=-NORM.INV(0.05;0;1)", and we got $z_{\alpha/2}=1.640$ , replacing into formula (3) we got:

$n=(\frac{1.640(2.5)}{2})^2 =4.2 \approx 5$

So the answer for this case would be n=5 rounded up to the nearest integer

6 0

3 years ago

1. If a scale factor is applied to a figure and all dimensions are changed proportionally, what is the effect on the perimeter o

tester [92]

Answer:

Part 1) The perimeter of the new figure must be equal to the perimeter of the original figure multiplied by the scale factor (see the explanation)

Part 2) The area of the new figure must be equal to the area of the original figure multiplied by the scale factor squared

Part 3) The new figure and the original figure are not similar figures (see the explanation)

Step-by-step explanation:

Part 1) If a scale factor is applied to a figure and all dimensions are changed proportionally, what is the effect on the perimeter of the figure?

we know that

If all dimensions are changed proportionally, then the new figure and the original figure are similar

When two figures are similar, the ratio of its perimeters is equal to the scale factor

so

The perimeter of the new figure must be equal to the perimeter of the original figure multiplied by the scale factor

Part 2) If a scale factor is applied to a figure and all dimensions are changed proportionally, what is the effect on the area of the figure?

we know that

If all dimensions are changed proportionally, then the new figure and the original figure are similar

When two figures are similar, the ratio of its areas is equal to the scale factor squared

so

The area of the new figure must be equal to the area of the original figure multiplied by the scale factor squared

Part 3) What would happen to the perimeter and area of a figure if the dimensions were changed NON-proportionally? For example, if the length of a rectangle was tripled, but the width did not change? Or if the length was tripled and the width was decreased by a factor of 1/4?

we know that

If the dimensions were changed NON-proportionally, then the ratio of the corresponding sides of the new figure and the original figure are not proportional

That means

The new figure and the original figure are not similar figures

therefore

Corresponding sides are not proportional and corresponding angles are not congruent

so

<u><em>A) If the length of a rectangle was tripled, but the width did not change?</em></u>

Perimeter

The original perimeter is P=2L+2W

The new perimeter would be P=2(3L)+2W ----> P=6L+2W

The perimeter of the new figure is greater than the perimeter of the original figure but are not proportionals

Area

The original area is A=LW

The new area would be A=(3L)(W) ----> A=3LW

The area of the new figure is three times the area of the original figure but its ratio is not equal to the scale factor squared, because there is no single scale factor

<u><em>B) If the length was tripled and the width was decreased by a factor of 1/4?</em></u>

Perimeter

The original perimeter is P=2L+2W

The new perimeter would be P=2(3L)+2(W/4) ----> P=6L+W/2

The perimeter of the new figure and the perimeter of the original figure are not proportionals

Area

The original area is A=LW

The new area would be A=(3L)(W/4) ----> A=(3/4)LW

The area of the new figure is three-fourth times the area of the original figure but its ratio is not equal to the scale factor squared, because there is no single scale factor

5 0

3 years ago

On a 8.5 x 11 inches (or larger) paper, create a carnival game (for example it could be: throwing a dart at a target, ball throu

Keith_Richards [23]

The probability of winning the game is 0.065

<h3>The description of the game</h3>

The game involves throwing two darts at two targets.

To win the game, the darts must hit anywhere in the following shapes