Answer:
No , the cause and effect can be finished up through analyses as it were.
What we have in the inquiry is only an observational investigation where we basically study 3000 grown-ups and attempt to outline the outcomes with no trial proof.
Imagine a scenario in which individuals who had breakfast normally were inclined to maintain their weight reduction, for sure if individuals who keep up weight reduction will in general have breakfast routinely.
henceforth the circumstances and logical results relationship cannot be built up
So as to do so , one must lead measurable trials, for example, autonomous example t test or ANOVA examination
Answer: 2^5
Step-by-step explanation: Diego should have added the exponents instead of multiplying them. I know it sounds weird but because both of the numbers are 2's you are able to combine them. When multiplying them together you should keep the base the same and add the exponents. In this case, 2^2 x 2^3 would be 2^5. Hope this helps.
Just do a proportion to set up your problem so you would have (1/2)=(8/x) then solve for x. which you would get 16
Answer:
p-value (0.0208) is less than alpha = 0.05 reject H0.
Step-by-step explanation:
we have the following data:
sample size = n = 75
x, the number to evaluate is 45
the sample proportion would be: x / n = 45/75
p * = 0.6
Now, the null and alternative hypotheses are:
H0: P = 0.72
Ha: P no 72
two tailed test
statistic tes = z = (p * - p) / [(p * (1-p) / n)] ^ (1/2)
replacing we have:
z = (0.6 - 0.72) / [(0.72 * (1-0.72) / 75)] ^ (1/2)
z = -2.31
p-vaule = 2 * p (z <-2.31)
using z table, we get:
p-vaule = 2 * (0.0104)
p-vaule = 0.0208
Therefore, p-value (0.0208) is less than alpha = 0.05 reject H0.
Answer:
c) 120
Step-by-step explanation:
f(x) = 7x^4 + 3x^2 - 4
f(-2) = 7(-2)^4 + 3(-2)^2 - 4 = 7(16) + 3(4) - 4 = 112 + 12 - 4 = 120
