Answer: 1.1
Step-by-step explanation:
2.4 - 1.3 = 1.1
Answer: 36 units squared.
Explanation:
Area of a traingle is given by,
| 0.5{x1(y2-y3) + x2(y3-y1) + x3(y1-y2)} |
Accepting the values of the coordinates in x's and y's,
x1 =0, y1=0
x2=3, y2=8
x3 =9, y3=0
= | 0.5 × (-72)|
= 36 unit squared.
You would use cross multiplication:
X/2,000 = 3/5
Multiply: 2,000*3= 6,000
Divide: 6,000/5
Answer: 1,200 doctors use brand x
First we need to write the null and alternate hypothesis for this case.
Let x be the average number of text message sent. Then
Null hypothesis: x = 100
Alternate hypothesis: x > 100
The p value is 0.0853
If p value > significance level, then the null hypothesis is not rejected. If p value < significance level, then the null hypothesis is rejected.
If significance level is 10%(0.10), the p value will be less than 0.10 and we reject the null hypothesis and CAN conclude that:
The mean number of text messages sent yesterday was greater than 100.
If significance level is 5%(0.05), the p value will be greater than 0.05 and we cannot reject the null hypothesis and CANNOT conclude that:
The mean number of text messages sent yesterday was greater than 100.
Answer:
The p value for this case would be given by:
For this case the p value is lower than the significance level so then we have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis so then we can conclude that the true proportion is significantly higher than 0.42
Step-by-step explanation:
Information given
n=1045 represent the random sample selected
X=502 represent the college graduates with a mentor
estimated proportion of college graduates with a mentor
is the value that we want to test
z would represent the statistic
represent the p value
Hypothesis to test
We want to test if the true proportion is higher than 0.42, the system of hypothesis are.:
Null hypothesis:
Alternative hypothesis:
The statistic is given by:
(1)
Replacing the info we got:
The p value for this case would be given by:
For this case the p value is lower than the significance level so then we have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis so then we can conclude that the true proportion is significantly higher than 0.42
