Solve the equation for the variable. Make sure your answer is in simplest form.
1 answer:
You might be interested in
- Since the p-value is approximately equal to zero (0), we can conclude that there is sufficient evidence that the true mean height for the baker's loaves of bread is greater than (>) 15 cm.
- Since 2.37 is greater than (>) 1.645, we reject the null hypothesis (H₀) at 5% level of significance. Therefore, we can conclude that the company’s claims are invalid.
A null hypothesis (H₀) can be defined the opposite of an alternate hypothesis (H₁) and it asserts that two (2) possibilities are the same.
For the baker's claim, the appropriate null and alternative hypotheses would be given by:
H₀: μ ≤ 15
H₁: μ > 15
Since the standard deviation for the height is given, the population would have a normal distribution, and the population standard deviation is given by:
Population standard deviation = σ/√n
Population standard deviation = 0.5/√10
Population standard deviation = 0.16.
For the p-value, we have:
The p-value is the probability that a sample mean would be the same or greater than (≥) 17 cm. Thus, the p-value is given by:
p-value = P(x > 17) ≈ 0.
Since the p-value is approximately equal to zero (0), we can conclude that there is sufficient evidence that the true mean height for the baker's loaves of bread is greater than (>) 15 cm.
Question 3.
For the oil company's claim, the appropriate null and alternative hypotheses would be given by:
H₀: μ = 0.15
H₁: μ > 0.15
<h3>How to calculate value of the z-score?</h3>The z-score can be calculated by using this formula:
<u>Where:</u>
- x is the sample mean.
- u is the mean.
- is the standard deviation.
- n is the number of boys.
Substituting the given parameters into the formula, we have;
z = 0.012/0.0633
z = 0.190.
From the z-table, a z-score of 0.190 is equal to a p-value of 2.37.
For the critical value, we have:
Critical probability (p*) = 1 - α/2
Critical probability (p*) = 1 - 0.1/2
Critical probability (p*) = 0.95.
Hence, the critical value is Zα/2 equal to 1.645.
Since 2.37 is greater than (>) 1.645, we reject the null hypothesis (H₀) at 5% level of significance. Therefore, we can conclude that the company’s claims are invalid.
Read more on null hypothesis here: brainly.com/question/14913351
#SPJ1
The picture in the attached figure
we know that
perimeter of a rectangle=2*[base+height]
base=3y+1
height=2y+3
perimeter=90 units
so
90=2*[(3y+1)+(2y+3)]-----> 90=2*[5y+4]----> 10y+8=90----> y=8.2 units
base=3y+1-----> base=3*8.2+1-----> 25.6 units
height=2y+3----> height= 2*8.2+3---> 19.4 units
the answer is
<span>the length of side vy is (2y+3)-----> 19.4 units</span>
we know that
perimeter of a rectangle=2*[base+height]
base=3y+1
height=2y+3
perimeter=90 units
so
90=2*[(3y+1)+(2y+3)]-----> 90=2*[5y+4]----> 10y+8=90----> y=8.2 units
base=3y+1-----> base=3*8.2+1-----> 25.6 units
height=2y+3----> height= 2*8.2+3---> 19.4 units
the answer is
<span>the length of side vy is (2y+3)-----> 19.4 units</span>