Assuming the - are bullet points and not negative signs:
sin = opposite/hypotenuse
cos = adjacent / hypotenuse
tan = opposite / adjacent.
Also remember the special properties of the 30 - 60 - 90 triangle.
This tells us that side AB = 9√3
Combining this info:
sin (C) = 9√3 ÷ 18 = √3 ÷ 2<span>
cos(B) = 9 </span>√3 ÷ 18 = √3 ÷ 2<span>
tan(C) = 9 </span>√3 ÷ 9 = √3<span>
sin(B) = 9 </span>÷ 18 = 1/2<span>
tan(B) = 9 </span>÷ 9√3 = 1 / √3 = √(3) ÷ 3
H=v/(2pir)
You just have to isolate h. To do that you are going to divide both sides by 2pir.
Answer:
Conclusion
There is no sufficient evidence to conclude that the mean of the home prices from Ascension parish is higher than the EBR mean
Step-by-step explanation:
From the question we are told that
The population mean for EBR is ![\mu_ 1 = \$239,000](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=%5Cmu_%201%20%20%3D%20%5C%24239%2C000)
The sample mean for Ascension parish is ![\= x_2 = \$246,000](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=%5C%3D%20x_2%20%20%3D%20%5C%24246%2C000)
The p-value is ![p-value = 0.045](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=p-value%20%20%3D%20%200.045)
The level of significance is ![\alpha = 0.01](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=%5Calpha%20%3D%200.01)
The null hypothesis is ![H_o : \mu_2 = \mu_1](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=H_o%20%3A%20%5Cmu_2%20%20%3D%20%5Cmu_1)
The alternative hypothesis is ![H_a : \mu_2 > \mu_1](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=H_a%20%20%3A%20%20%5Cmu_2%20%3E%20%5Cmu_1)
Here
is the population mean for Ascension parish
From the data given values we see that
![p-value > \alpha](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=p-value%20%20%3E%20%20%5Calpha)
So we fail to reject the null hypothesis
So we conclude that there is no sufficient evidence to conclude that the mean of the home prices from Ascension parish is higher than the EBR mean
45 divided by 3= 15 then 15 times 4 =60 mph