Consider this argument: LOGIC BASED, NOT PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
1 answer:
You might be interested in
Answer:
So the Null hypothesis is rejected in this case
Step-by-step explanation:
The number of celebrities is n = 348
So to solve this we would assume that p is the percentage of people that died on the month preceding their birth month
Generally if there is no death postponement then p will be mathematically evaluated as
This implies the probability of date in one month out of the 12 months
Now from the question we can deduce that the hypothesis we are going to be testing is
This is a hypothesis is stating that a celebrity dies in the month preceding their birth
This is a hypothesis is stating that a celebrity does not die in the month preceding their birth
is c is the represent probability for each celebrity which either c = 0 or c = 1
Where c = 0 is that the probability that the celebrity does not die on the month preceding his/ her birth month
and c = 1 is that the probability that the celebrity dies on the month preceding his/ her birth month
Then it implies that
for
n= 1 + 2 + 3 + .... + 348 celebrities
Then the sum of c for each celebrity would be
i.e The number of celebrities that died in the month preceding their birth month
We are told that the significance level is , the the z value of
is
This is obtained from the z-table
Since this test is carried out on the left side of the area under the normal curve then the critical value will be
So what this implies is that will be rejected if
Here z is the test statistics
Now z is mathematically evaluated as follows
From our calculation we see that the value of z is less than so the Null hypothesis will be rejected
Hence this tell us that the evidence provided is not enough to conclude that 16 celebrities died a month to their birth month