Answer:
A(2/9, 1/3)
B(2/3, -1/3)
slope = -1.5
Step-by-step explanation:
A graph can show the coordinates of interest: A(2/9, 1/3); B(2/3, -1/3).
Rearranging the equation to slope-intercept form, we have ...
3y = -4.5x +2
y = -1.5x +2/3
The slope is -1.5.
Complete question :
According to the National Association of Realtors, it took an average of three weeks to sell a home in 2017. Suppose data for the sale of 39 randomly selected homes sold in Greene County, Ohio, in 2017 showed a sample mean of 3.6 weeks with a sample standard deviation of 2 weeks. Conduct a hypothesis test to determine whether the number of weeks until a house sold in Greene County differed from the national average in 2017. Useα = 0.05for the level of significance, and state your conclusion
Answer:
H0 : μ = 3
H1 : μ ≠ 3
Test statistic = 1.897
Pvalue = 0.0653
fail to reject the Null ; Hence, we conclude that their is no significant to accept the claim that number I weeks taken to sell a house differs.
Step-by-step explanation:
Given :
Sample size, n = 40
Sample mean, x = 3.6
Population mean, μ = 3
Standard deviation, s = 2
The hypothesis :
H0 : μ = 3
H1 : μ ≠ 3
The test statistic :
(xbar - μ) ÷ (s/√n)
(3.6 - 3) / (2/√40)
0.6 / 0.3162277
Test statistic = 1.897
Using T test, we can obtain the Pvalue from the Test statistic value obtained :
df = n - 1; 40 - 1 = 39
Pvalue(1.897, 39) = 0.0653
Decison region :
If Pvalue ≤ α ; Reject the null, if otherwise fail to reject the Null.
α = 0.05
Pvalue > α ; We fail to reject the Null ; Hence, we conclude that their is no significant to accept the claim that number I weeks taken to sell a house differs.
Answer:
The Answer is y=-4x
Step-by-step explanation:
have a good day ♡
Answer:
6 cheese pizzas
Step-by-step explanation:
3 / 9 = 3
3x2=6
Answer:
Line 3 is incorrect; we don't know anything about the lengths of HG, FG, HE, and EF, so this line is not valid based on the given information.
Step-by-step explanation:
In the Noah's poof of the construction, segment EG would divide angle FGH into two equal parts, which makes line 2 to be valid. i.e <EGH ≅ <EGF. And it can also be observed that line 4 is a valid theorem in proving the congruent nature of triangles.
But line 3 is not valid because of the condition of the statement. Furthermore, segments FG, EG, HG, HE and FE may not be congruent. Thus, the condition of the statement in line 3 is incorrect.
