All categories

3 years ago

Helping my 6th grader with math and I'm lost!

1 answer:

4 0

$\bf 56+24~~\begin{cases}56=2\cdot 2\cdot 2\cdot 7\\24=2\cdot 2\cdot 2\cdot 3\end{cases}\implies \stackrel{\textit{GCF is }2\cdot 2\cdot 2}{2\cdot 2\cdot 2(7+3)}\implies 8(7+3)$

You might be interested in

Nathan ate 5 over 6 of his sandwich Leroy ate 7 over 8 of his sandwich and Sofia ate 5 over 8 of her sandwich who ate the greate

Oliga [24]

First you have to find a common denominator which would be 24.
5/6 = 20/24
7/8 = 21/24
5/8 = 15/24
So your final answer would be 7 over 8.

5 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

What is 956.074054898 rounded to the nearest whole number

Aleks [24]

956 dude this is not difficult

3 0

3 years ago

Which property explains how we get the equation shown in step 2? Given: -5(x -4) - 20 = -15 Step 1: -5x + 20 -20 = -15 (Distribu

Talja [164]

Step 2: <span>Inverse Property of Addition
</span><span>any number added to its opposite will equal zero
</span>in this case + 20 - 20 = 0

answer
Inverse Property of Addition

8 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

An aquarium is being filled at a rate of 2.5 inches per second. The equationLaTeX: y=2.5xy = 2.5 x is used to determine the heig

Reika [66]

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

Given the equation y = 2,5x

y is the height of the water

x is the time.

To get the range of values of the height at t = 60s, we will substitute x = 60 into the function

y = 2.5(60)

y = 150 in

Hence the range of the situation is [0, 150].

The domain will be all positive integers i.e xEZ

3 0

2 years ago

The Salk polio vaccine experiment in 1954 focused on the effectiveness of the vaccine in combating paralytic polio. Because it w

sdas [7]

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

Hello!

The variables of interest are:

X₁: Number of cases of polio observed in kids that received the placebo vaccine.

n₁= 201299 total children studied

x₁= 110 cases observed

X₂: Number of cases of polio observed in kids that received the experimental vaccine.

n₂= 200745 total children studied

x₂= 33 cases observed

These two variables have a binomial distribution. The parameters of interest, the ones to compare, are the population proportions: p₁ vs p₂

You have to test if the population proportions of children who contracted polio in both groups are different: p₂ ≠ p₁

H₀: p₂ = p₁

H₁: p₂ ≠ p₁

α: 0.05

$Z= \frac{(p'_2-p'_1)-(p_2-p_1)}{\sqrt{p'[\frac{1}{n_1} +\frac{1}{n_2} ]} }$

Sample proportion placebo p'₁= x₁/n₁= 110/201299= 0.0005

Sample proportion vaccine p'₂= x₂/n₂= 33/200745= 0.0002

Pooled sample proportion p'= (x₁+x₂)/(n₁+n₂)= (110+33)/(201299+200745)= 0.0004

$Z_{H_0}= \frac{(0.0002-0.0005)-0}{\sqrt{0.0004[\frac{1}{201299} +\frac{1}{200745} ]} }= -4.76$

This test is two-tailed, using the critical value approach, you have to determine two critical values:

$Z_{\alpha/2}= Z_{0.025}= -1.96$

$Z_{1-\alpha /2}= Z_{0.975}= 1.96$

Then if $Z_{H_0}$ ≤ -1.96 or if $Z_{H_0}$ ≥ 1.96, the decision is to reject the null hypothesis.

If -1.96 < $Z_{H_0}$ < 1.96, the decision is to not reject the null hypothesis.

⇒ $Z_{H_0}$ = -4.76, the decision is to reject the null hypothesis.

H₀: p₂ = p₁

H₁: p₂ ≠ p₁

α: 0.01

$Z= \frac{(p'_2-p'_1)-(p_2-p_1)}{\sqrt{p'[\frac{1}{n_1} +\frac{1}{n_2} ]} }$

The value of $Z_{H_0}$ = -4.76 doesn't change, since we are working with the same samples.

The only thing that changes alongside with the level of significance is the rejection region:

$Z_{\alpha /2}= Z_{0.005}= -2.576$

$Z_{1-\alpha /2}= Z_{0.995}= 2.576$

Then if $Z_{H_0}$ ≤ -2.576or if $Z_{H_0}$ ≥ 2.576, the decision is to reject the null hypothesis.

If -2.576< $Z_{H_0}$ < 2.576, the decision is to not reject the null hypothesis.

⇒ $Z_{H_0}$ = -4.76, the decision is to reject the null hypothesis.

Remember the level of significance (probability of committing type I error) is the probability of rejecting a true null hypothesis. This means that the smaller this value is, the fewer chances you have of discarding the true null hypothesis. But as you know, you cannot just reduce this value to zero because, the smaller α is, the bigger β (probability of committing type II error) becomes.

Rejecting the null hypothesis using different values of α means that there is a high chance that you reached a correct decision (rejecting a false null hypothesis)

I hope this helps!

8 0

3 years ago