<em>Answer:</em>
<em>Can be found below</em>
<em>Step-by-step explanation:</em>
<em>Part A:</em>
<em>So we know that the bacteria doubles every (30) minutes.</em>
<em>2000 times 2 equals 4000 (30 minutes)</em>
<em>4000 times 2 equals 8000 (1 hour)</em>
<em>Answer for Part A:</em>
<em>8000 bacteria</em>
<em>Part B:</em>
<em>Now we do this function 2000(2)^14 (30 minutes long)</em>
<em>Answer to Part B: </em>
<em>I believe the answer is 32,768,000 (Please correct me if I'm wrong) </em>
<em>Hope I could help!! Have a great day/night!</em>
<em>Any constructional messages are greatly appreciated!!</em>
C. The range represents the number of users each month for 36 months.
Answer: Choice B
There is not convincing evidence because the interval contains 0.
========================================================
Explanation:
The confidence interval is (-0.29, 0.09)
This is the same as writing -0.29 < p1-p1 < 0.09
The thing we're trying to estimate (p1-p2) is between -0.29 and 0.09
Because 0 is in this interval, it is possible that p1-p1 = 0 which leads to p1 = p2.
Therefore, it is possible that the population proportions are the same.
The question asks " is there convincing evidence of a difference in the true proportions", so the answer to this is "no, there isn't convincing evidence". We would need both endpoints of the confidence interval to either be positive together, or be negative together, for us to have convincing evidence that the population proportions are different.
