Answer:
hi! you have 2 points! this means slope formula! y2-y1/x2-x1
okay all you do now is plugin! (x1 1,y1 3) (x2 3,y2 7) what I did was label your x1 y1 x2 y2! now just follow the formula and that / is division or basically a fraction
7-3/3-1
that equals -5! and that's your slope! memorize the formula it helpss!
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
191.2 = 2.3L +65.5
191.2 - 65.5 = 2.3L {Subtract 65.5 from both sides}
125.7= 2.3L
L = 125.7/2.3
L = 54.65
Answer:
x = 3.7
Step-by-step explanation:
Apply trigonometric function to find x
Reference angle = 24°
Opposite = x
Hypotenuse = 9
This, apply SOH:
Sin 24 = Opp/Hyp
Sin 24 = x/9
9 × Sin 24 = x
3.66062979 = x
x = 3.7 (nearest tenth)
Answer:
-1.28
Step-by-step explanation:
You would put these two equations into a graphing ccalculator:
y = -4x - 1
and
y= 5^x + 4
Wherver they intersect is your answer.
These two happen to intersect at (-1.28,4.13)
Since the equation has x-values, you would give the first number (x-coordinate) as your answer.
Answer:
The sample size is too small
Step-by-step explanation:
The answer is the last one: the sample size is too small. Since we only got 3 subjects to test, maybe one of them could live for a long time after the diagnosis of Cacer and that made the average survival time go up by a lot.
In order to obtain results with a significance level higher, you need a sample size of at least 20 subjects.
Now lets see why other options wouldnt be good answers:
- For a small amount of subjects, it is unlikely to have errors in caculation
- The sample size is given
- We are not given information about the treatment and we dont even know if the subjects feel more confident with the new treatment. Also, if a Placebo effect works regularly, it shouldnt limit statistical sifgnificance
- An increase in 2 years is huge in comparison with the previous survival time.