All categories

1 year ago

Unproctored Placement ASThe quadrilaterals JKLM and PQRS are similar.Find the length x of PQ.JM=5, PS=4.5, JK=3.35K4.5PheHO1.8

Mathematics

1 answer:

Pachacha [2.7K]1 year ago

6 0

Given that the quadrilaterals are similar, we know that:

$\frac{JM}{JK}=\frac{PS}{PQ}.$

Substituting the given values, we get:

$\frac{5}{4.5}=\frac{3}{x}.$

Solving the above equation for x, we get:

$\begin{gathered} 5x=3(4.5), \\ x=\frac{3(4.5)}{5}. \end{gathered}$

Simplifying the above result, we get:

$x=2.7$

<h2>Answer:</h2> $x=2.7$

You might be interested in

.) What is the Greatest Common Factor of x5,x4, and x3?

Viefleur [7K]

40 common factors multiplication

7 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

During science class,jimmy heated a substance and recorded the temperature of the substance over several minutes. He used the da

Elenna [48]

It’s -18 that’s the answer

8 0

3 years ago

Please can someone help ?

skelet666 [1.2K]

Yes What do you need help with ?

7 0

3 years ago

Given the parent function f(x)=x^3 give the best description of the graph of y = -(2x)^3

GalinKa [24]

Answer:

Reflect and compress

Step-by-step explanation:

7 0

3 years ago

2. The National Safety Council routinely analyzes the benefit of seat belt use on driver safety. Their data showed that among 28

JulijaS [17]

Answer:

We conclude that there is difference in the proportion of deaths between the 2 groups.

Step-by-step explanation:

We are given that among 2823 drivers not wearing seat belts, 31 died as a result of injuries, and among 7765 drivers wearing seat belts 16 were killed.

Let $p_1$ = proportion of deaths when drivers were not wearing seat belts.

$p_2$ = proportion of deaths when drivers were wearing seat belts.

So, Null Hypothesis, $H_0$ : $p_1=p_2$ {means that there is no difference in the proportion of deaths between the 2 groups}

Alternate Hypothesis, $H_A$ : $p_1\neq p_2$ {means that there is difference in the proportion of deaths between the 2 groups}

The test statistics that would be used here Two-sample z test for proportions;

T.S. = $\frac{(\hat p_1-\hat p_2)-(p_1-p_2)}{\sqrt{\frac{\hat p_1(1-\hat p_1)}{n_1}+\frac{\hat p_2(1-\hat p_2)}{n_2} } }$ ~ N(0,1)

where, $\hat p_1$ = sample proportion of deaths when drivers were not wearing seat belts = $\frac{31}{2823}$ = 0.011

$\hat p_2$ = sample proportion of deaths when drivers were wearing seat belts = $\frac{16}{7765}$ = 0.002

$n_1$ = sample of drivers not wearing seat belts = 2823

$n_2$ = sample of drivers wearing seat belts = 7765

So, the test statistics = $\frac{(0.011-0.002)-(0)}{\sqrt{\frac{0.011(1-0.011)}{2823}+\frac{0.002(1-0.002)}{7765} } }$

= 4.438

The value of z test statistics is 4.438.

Now, at 5% significance level the z table gives critical values of -1.96 and 1.96 for two-tailed test.

Since our test statistic doesn't lie within the range of critical values of z, so we have sufficient evidence to reject our null hypothesis as it will fall in the rejection region due to which we reject our null hypothesis.

Therefore, we conclude that there is difference in the proportion of deaths between the 2 groups.

Also, Margin of error (E) = $1.96 \times \sqrt{\frac{\hat p_1(1-\hat p_1)}{n_1}+\frac{\hat p_2(1-\hat p_2)}{n_2} }$

= $1.96 \times \sqrt{\frac{0.011(1-0.011)}{2823}+\frac{0.002(1-0.002)}{7765} }$

= 0.00397

5 0

3 years ago