I would think you would use 1/3 of a cup but I am not sure.Hope it helps!
Answer:
1.1
Step-by-step explanation:
In this image, we can see that every box, we add 0.2
From 0.1 to 0.3, we add 0.2
We continue with this pattern for the rest of the boxes
When adding decimals, you can imagine it like you are adding normal numbers, and that you are carrying extra (more than 9) to the next column in the same way.
{column/place value}
At first, it might seem like adding 0.2 to 0.9 would result in 0.11, but let's think that through a little bit more. We know that 0.1 is less than 0.2, so, it doesn't make sense for that to be the sum.
Instead, we have to carry the 11 over to the other side of the decimal. (This is because each place value is equal to 10 of the value to the right. If we add digits in the ones place that add up to 10, we carry the "1" over to the right, into the tens place.)
So, we carry the "1" from 11 to the one's place. Now, we are left with
1.1
(hope this helps!! decimals can be tricky at first)
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.
