A common misconception in statistics is confusing correlation with causation. If two events are correlated, it merely means that they share the same behaviour over time, but it doesn't imply in any way that those event are related by a common cause, or even worse, that one implies the other.
You can find several (even humorous) counter examples online. For example, if you plot the number of reported pirates assault against the global temperature in the last years, you'll se that temperature is rising (unfortunately...) while pirates are almost disappearing.
One could observe this strong negative correlation and claim that hotter climate has solved the pirate issue. Of course this is a joke, but it explains why you shouldn't confuse correlation with causation.
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
tell me the question ?? did not say the question ok ??
Answer: Option 'D' is correct.
Step-by-step explanation:
Since we have given that
Upper P (Upper B vertical line Upper A)
means
It means that probability of getting event B given that Event A is occurred.
D. The probability of event B occurring, given that event A has already occurred. is also expressed as
Hence, Option 'D' is correct.
Part A:
- np -80 <60
Adding 80 both sides
- np < 140
Dividing by -p both sides
n > -140/p
Part B:
2a - 5d =30
5d = 2a-30
d= (2a-30)/5
Answer:
Alternate interior angles theorem
Hope this helps
- Que
