Answer:
correct
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
The graph below shows the answer to
2x - 3y < 12
Also shown as
-3y < -2x + 12
Step-by-step explanation:
You can rearrange the inequality by subtracting 2x from both sides to isolate the y.
You now have -3y < 12 -2x
which can be put into the standard linear equation form of
-3y < -2x + 12
Then you divide both sides by -3 to get singular value of y, which is something like
-3/-3y < -2/-3x + 12/-3
which is
y > 2/3x -4
Note: I switched direction of the inequality because you are dividing both sides by a negative value.
Answer:
I have no idea. Umm maybe ask your mom. Or dad do either of them know math?
U could try to email your teacher.
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
no
Step-by-step explanation:
y=mx+b
hope this helps
Answer: Choice B
There is not convincing evidence because the interval contains 0.
========================================================
Explanation:
The confidence interval is (-0.29, 0.09)
This is the same as writing -0.29 < p1-p1 < 0.09
The thing we're trying to estimate (p1-p2) is between -0.29 and 0.09
Because 0 is in this interval, it is possible that p1-p1 = 0 which leads to p1 = p2.
Therefore, it is possible that the population proportions are the same.
The question asks " is there convincing evidence of a difference in the true proportions", so the answer to this is "no, there isn't convincing evidence". We would need both endpoints of the confidence interval to either be positive together, or be negative together, for us to have convincing evidence that the population proportions are different.
