All categories

3 years ago

Rewrite this formula to convert Fahrenheit to Celsius (linear equations and inequalities)

Mathematics

1 answer:

Luba_88 [7]3 years ago

6 0

Answer:

The formula used to convert Fahrenheit in to Celsius is:

$C = ( F - 32) \times (\frac{5}{9})$

Step-by-step explanation:

Here, the given expression is :

$F=(\frac{9}{5}) c + 32$

The above expression converts Celsius in to Fahrenheit.

Now we need an expression to convert Fahrenheit in to Celsius.

Simplifying the above for the value of C, we get:

$F=(\frac{9}{5}) c + 32\\\implies F - 32 =(\frac{9}{5}) c \\\implies ( F - 32) \times (\frac{5}{9}) = c\\\implies C = ( F - 32) \times (\frac{5}{9})$

Hence, the formula used to convert Fahrenheit in to Celsius is:

$C = ( F - 32) \times (\frac{5}{9})$

You might be interested in

Anyone know the answer

kykrilka [37]

You would need to change the slope to -6 because perpendicular lines have opposite reciprocal slopes.

5 0

3 years ago

I need an answer asap if you know thanks it is worth a lot of points your welcome

Snowcat [4.5K]

A. multiplication is your answer.

6 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Let $$X_1, X_2, ...X_n$$ be uniformly distributed on the interval 0 to a. Recall that the maximum likelihood estimator of a is $

Solnce55 [7]

Answer:

a) $\hat a = max(X_i)$

For this case the value for $\hat a$ is always smaller than the value of a, assuming $X_i \sim Unif[0,a]$ So then for this case it cannot be unbiased because an unbiased estimator satisfy this property:

$E(a) - a= 0$ and that's not our case.

b) $E(\hat a) - a= \frac{na}{n+1} - a = \frac{na -an -a}{n+1}= \frac{-a}{n+1}$

Since is a negative value we can conclude that underestimate the real value a.

$\lim_{ n \to\infty} -\frac{1}{n+1}= 0$

c) $P(Y \leq y) = P(max(X_i) \leq y) = P(X_1 \leq y, X_2 \leq y, ..., X_n\leq y)$

And assuming independence we have this:

$P(Y \leq y) = P(X_1 \leq y) P(X_2 \leq y) .... P(X_n \leq y) = [P(X_1 \leq y)]^n = (\frac{y}{a})^n$

$f_Y (Y) = n (\frac{y}{a})^{n-1} * \frac{1}{a}= \frac{n}{a^n} y^{n-1} , y \in [0,a]$

e) On this case we see that the estimator $\hat a_1$ is better than $\hat a_2$ and the reason why is because:

$V(\hat a_1) > V(\hat a_2)$

$\frac{a^2}{3n}> \frac{a^2}{n(n+2)}$

$n(n+2) = n^2 + 2n > n +2n = 3n$ and that's satisfied for n>1.

Step-by-step explanation:

Part a

For this case we are assuming $X_1, X_2 , ..., X_n \sim U(0,a)$

And we are are ssuming the following estimator:

$\hat a = max(X_i)$

$E(a) - a= 0$ and that's not our case.

Part b

For this case we assume that the estimator is given by:

$E(\hat a) = \frac{na}{n+1}$

And using the definition of bias we have this:

$E(\hat a) - a= \frac{na}{n+1} - a = \frac{na -an -a}{n+1}= \frac{-a}{n+1}$

Since is a negative value we can conclude that underestimate the real value a.

And when we take the limit when n tend to infinity we got that the bias tend to 0.

$\lim_{ n \to\infty} -\frac{1}{n+1}= 0$

Part c

For this case we the followng random variable $Y = max (X_i)$ and we can find the cumulative distribution function like this:

$P(Y \leq y) = P(max(X_i) \leq y) = P(X_1 \leq y, X_2 \leq y, ..., X_n\leq y)$

And assuming independence we have this:

$P(Y \leq y) = P(X_1 \leq y) P(X_2 \leq y) .... P(X_n \leq y) = [P(X_1 \leq y)]^n = (\frac{y}{a})^n$

Since all the random variables have the same distribution.

Now we can find the density function derivating the distribution function like this:

$f_Y (Y) = n (\frac{y}{a})^{n-1} * \frac{1}{a}= \frac{n}{a^n} y^{n-1} , y \in [0,a]$

Now we can find the expected value for the random variable Y and we got this:

$E(Y) = \int_{0}^a \frac{n}{a^n} y^n dy = \frac{n}{a^n} \frac{a^{n+1}}{n+1}= \frac{an}{n+1}$

And the bias is given by:

$E(Y)-a=\frac{an}{n+1} -a=\frac{an-an-a}{n+1}= -\frac{a}{n+1}$

And again since the bias is not 0 we have a biased estimator.

Part e

For this case we have two estimators with the following variances:

$V(\hat a_1) = \frac{a^2}{3n}$

$V(\hat a_2) = \frac{a^2}{n(n+2)}$

On this case we see that the estimator $\hat a_1$ is better than $\hat a_2$ and the reason why is because:

$V(\hat a_1) > V(\hat a_2)$

$\frac{a^2}{3n}> \frac{a^2}{n(n+2)}$

$n(n+2) = n^2 + 2n > n +2n = 3n$ and that's satisfied for n>1.

8 0

3 years ago

PLEASE HELP OUT!!! im super lost.

Alex73 [517]

Just replace X with the given value.

X = -3

f(-3) = 5 - (-3)

f(-3) = 5 +3

f(-3) = 8

3 0

3 years ago

Answer and explain I’ll mark brainliest please help!!!!!

Papessa [141]

Answer:

230 were sold at the door

170 were sold in advance

Step-by-step explanation:

x=at door y=in advance

x+y=400

3x+2y=1030

y=-x+400

2y=-3x+1030

y=-3/2x+515

-x+400=-3/2x+515

x=230 y=170

8 0

3 years ago