Ask question

Ask question

All categories

pishuonlain [190]

3 years ago

13

Mrs Stephens drove through a total of 36 intersections on her way home from work last week.At 4 of every 16 intersections,Mrs.St

ephens had to stop for for a red light before she could drive through.At how many intersections did Mrs.Stephens have to stop for a red light?

2 answers:

cricket20 [7]3 years ago

5 0

The answer is 8 hope this helps

d1i1m1o1n [39]3 years ago

4 0

9. The answer is 9 because 16+16=32, which is not 36, right? Right. So we divide 16 by 4 to get 4 and since every 4 out of 16 intersections, She stops, we take that ratio like a fraction: 4/16 is equal to 1/4. So she stops at 9 intersections. Hope this helps. C;

You might be interested in

7. A sales girl is paid Rs 5,000 per month as salary and a 4 commission of % on total sales. If she receives Rs 5,192 at the end

kari74 [83]

Answer:

Sh 4800

Step-by-step explanation:

5192 - 5000 = 192 ( which is the total commission)

4% = 192

100%=? ( so we get the total sales)

100*192/4 = 4800 ( which is the total sales )

5 0

2 years ago

I will make you has brainliest please help with these questions

zlopas [31]

Answer:

Your photo is not perfect

6 0

3 years ago

7 ^ 8 times 7 ^ 3 times 7 ^ 4 / 7 ^ 9 times 7 ^ 5

Alex777 [14]

Answer:

7^8 =5764801 * 7^3 =343 * 7^4 =2401 ÷ 7^9 = 40353607 * 7^5 =16807

5764801 *343 *2401 ÷ 40353607 *16807

=4747561509943 ÷ 678223072849 = 7

4 0

3 years ago

What is the answer for 3x=1.2+1.2+1.2

Savatey [412]

The answer is 1.2 b/c you have to solve x by simplifying both sides of the equation and isolating the variable.

5 0

4 years ago

Country Financial, a financial services company, uses surveys of adults age and older to determine if personal financial fitness

Yakvenalex [24]

Complete Question

Country financials, a financial services company, uses surveys of adults age 18 and older to determine if personal financial fitness is changing over time. In February 2012, a sample of 1000 adults showed 410 indicating that their financial security was more that fair. In Feb 2010, a sample of 900 adults showed 315 indicating that their financial security was more than fair.

a

State the hypotheses that can be used to test for a significant difference between the population proportions for the two years.

b

What is the sample proportion indicating that their financial security was more that fair in 2012?In 2010?

c

Conduct the hypothesis test and compute the p-value.At a .05 level of significance what is your conclusion?

Answer:

a

The null hypothesis is $H_o : p_1 = p_2$

The alternative hypothesis is $H_a : p_1 \ne p_2$

b

in 2012 $\r p_1 =0.41$

in 2010 $\r p_2 =0.35$

c

The p-value is $p-value = 0.0072$

The conclusion is

There is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of those indicating that financial security is more fair in Feb 2010 is different from the proportion of those indicating that financial security is more fair in Feb 2012.

Step-by-step explanation:

From the question we are told that

The sample size in 2012 is $n_1 = 1000$

The number that indicated that their finance was more than fail is k = 410

The sample size in 2010 is $n_2 = 900$

The number that indicated that their finance was more than fail is u = 315

The level of significance is $\alpha = 0.05[/ex]The null hypothesis is [tex]H_o : p_1 = p_2$

The alternative hypothesis is $H_a : p_1 \ne p_2$

Generally the sample proportion for 2012 is mathematically represented as

$\r p_1 = \frac{k}{n_1}$

=> $\r p_1 = \frac{410}{1000}$

=> $\r p_1 =0.41$

Generally the sample proportion for 2010 is mathematically represented as

$\r p_2 = \frac{u}{n_2}$

=> $\r p_2 = \frac{315}{900}$

=> $\r p_2 =0.35$

Generally the pooled sample proportion is mathematically represented as

$\r p = \frac{k + u }{n_1 + n_2}$

=> $\r p = \frac{410 + 315 }{1000+ 900}$

=> $\r p = 0.3816$

Generally the test statistics is mathematically represented as

$z = \frac{( \r p_1 - \r p_2 ) - 0}{\sqrt{\r p (1 - \r p ) ( \frac{1}{n_1} +\frac{1}{n_2} )} }$

$z = \frac{( 0.41 -0.35 ) - 0}{\sqrt{0.3816 (1 - 0.3816 ) ( \frac{1}{1000} +\frac{1}{900} )} }$

$z = \frac{( 0.41 -0.35 ) - 0}{\sqrt{0.3816 (1 - 0.3816 ) ( \frac{1}{1000} +\frac{1}{900} )} }$

$z = 2.688$

Generally the p- value is mathematically represented as

$p-value = 2 P(Z >2.688 )$

From the z -table

$P(Z > 2.688) = 0.0036$

So

$p-value = 2 *0.0036$

$p-value = 0.0072$

So from the p-value obtained we see that p-value < $\alpha$ so we reject the null hypothesis

Thus there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the proportion of financial security is more fair in Feb 2010 is different from the proportion of financial security is more fair in Feb 2012.

5 0

4 years ago