8 to the power of 8 times 5 to the power of 8 simplify the expression

Help help help help help m at h math math

Alex777 [14]

Answer:X= 6X-14

Step-by-step explanation:

5 0

2 years ago

In San Jose a sample of 73 mail carriers showed that 30 had been bitten by an animal during one week. In San Francisco in a samp

dsp73

Answer:

$(0.411-0.7) - 1.96 \sqrt{\frac{0.411(1-0.411)}{73} +\frac{0.7(1-0.7)}{80}}=-0.4401$

$(0.411-0.7) + 1.96 \sqrt{\frac{0.411(1-0.411)}{73} +\frac{0.7(1-0.7)}{80}}=-0.1380$

We are confident at 95% that the difference between the two proportions is between $-0.4401 \leq p_B -p_A \leq -0.1380$

1. -.4401 ≤ p1 - p2 ≤ -.1380

4. The rate of mail carriers being bitten in San Jose is statistically less than the rate San Francisco at α = 5%

Step-by-step explanation:

In San Jose a sample of 73 mail carriers showed that 30 had been bitten by an animal during one week. In San Francisco in a sample of 80 mail carriers, 56 had received animal bites. Is there a significant difference in the proportions? Use a 0.05. Find the 95% confidence interval for the difference of the two proportions. Sellect all correct statements below based on the data given in this problem.

1. -.4401 ≤ p1 - p2 ≤ -.1380

2. -.4401 ≤ p1 - p2 ≤ .1380

3. The rate of mail carriers being bitten in San Jose is statistically greater than the rate San Francisco at α = 5%

4. The rate of mail carriers being bitten in San Jose is statistically less than the rate San Francisco at α = 5%

5. The rate of mail carriers being bitten in San Jose and San Francisco are statistically equal at α = 5%

Solution to the problem

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".

$p_1$ represent the real population proportion for San Jose

$\hat p_1 =\frac{30}{73}=0.411$ represent the estimated proportion for San Jos

$n_1=73$ is the sample size required for San Jose

$p_2$ represent the real population proportion for San Francisco

$\hat p_2 =\frac{56}{80}=0.7$ represent the estimated proportion for San Francisco

$n_2=80$ is the sample size required for San Francisco

$z$ represent the critical value for the margin of error

The population proportion have the following distribution

$p \sim N(p,\sqrt{\frac{p(1-p)}{n}})$

The confidence interval for the difference of two proportions would be given by this formula

$(\hat p_1 -\hat p_1) \pm z_{\alpha/2} \sqrt{\frac{\hat p_1(1-\hat p_1)}{n_1} +\frac{\hat p_2 (1-\hat p_2)}{n_2}}$

For the 95% confidence interval the value of $\alpha=1-0.95=0.05$ and $\alpha/2=0.025$ , with that value we can find the quantile required for the interval in the normal standard distribution.

$z_{\alpha/2}=1.96$

And replacing into the confidence interval formula we got:

$(0.411-0.7) - 1.96 \sqrt{\frac{0.411(1-0.411)}{73} +\frac{0.7(1-0.7)}{80}}=-0.4401$

$(0.411-0.7) + 1.96 \sqrt{\frac{0.411(1-0.411)}{73} +\frac{0.7(1-0.7)}{80}}=-0.1380$

We are confident at 95% that the difference between the two proportions is between $-0.4401 \leq p_B -p_A \leq -0.1380$

Since the confidence interval contains all negative values we can conclude that the proportion for San Jose is significantly lower than the proportion for San Francisco at 5% level.

Based on this the correct options are:

1. -.4401 ≤ p1 - p2 ≤ -.1380

4. The rate of mail carriers being bitten in San Jose is statistically less than the rate San Francisco at α = 5%

8 0

3 years ago

Research has shown that approximately 1 woman in 600 carries a mutation of a particular gene. About66 % of women with this muta

UNO [17]

Answer:

add otherwise I don't know sorry im on that question

Step-by-step explanation:

6 0

2 years ago

Which equations represent the line that is parallel to 3x − 4y = 7 and passes through the point (−4, −2)? Check all that apply.

jonny [76]

First, we find the slope of the given line.

<span>3x − 4y = 7

-4y = -3x + 7

y = (3/4)x - 7/4

The slope of the given line is 3/4.
The slope of the parallel line is also 3/4.

Now we need the equation of the line that has slope 3/4 and passes through point (-4, -2),

We use the point-slope form of the equation of a line.

y - y1 = m(x - x1)

y - (-2) = (3/4)(x - (-4))

y + 2 = (3/4)(x + 4) <---- check option E. Is the fraction 3/4 not there?

y + 2 = (3/4)x + 3

y = (3/4)x + 1

4y = 3x + 4

3x - 4y = -4 <------ this is choice B.
</span>

8 0

3 years ago

A manufacturer of running shoes knows that the average lifetime for a particular model of shoes is 15 months. Someone in the res

AveGali [126]

Answer:

The decision rule is

Fail to reject the null hypothesis

The conclusion is

There is no sufficient evidence to show that the designer's claim of a better shoe is supported by the trial results.

Step-by-step explanation:

From the question we are told that

The population mean is $\mu = 15 \ months$

The sample size is n = 25

The sample mean is $\= x = 17 \ months$

The standard deviation is $s = 5.5 \ months$

Let assume the level of significance of this test is $\alpha = 0.05$

The null hypothesis is $H_o : \mu = 15$

The alternative hypothesis is $H_a : \mu > 17$

Generally the degree of freedom is mathematically represented as

$df = n -1$

=> $df = 25 -1$

=> $df = 24$

Generally the test statistics is mathematically represented as

$t = \frac{\= x- \mu }{\frac{s}{\sqrt{n} } }$

=> $t = \frac{ 17 - 15 }{\frac{5.5}{\sqrt{25} } }$

=> $t = 1.8182$

Generally from the student t distribution table the probability of obtaining $t = 1.8182$ to the right of the curve at a degree of freedom of $df = 24$ is

$p-value = P(t > 0.18182 ) = 0.4286$

From the value obtained we see that $p-value > \alpha$ hence

The decision rule is

Fail to reject the null hypothesis

The conclusion is

There is no sufficient evidence to show that the designer's claim of a better shoe is supported by the trial results.

7 0

2 years ago