Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
no, he is not. He literally added the numerators and the denominators. When ur adding fractions with the same denominator, u just add the numerators and keep the same denominator.
1/5 + 2/5 = 3/5
Answer:
Step-by-step explanation:
hmm idk bro thats wack
Answer:
Option A.
Step-by-step explanation:
we know that
The compound interest formula is equal to
where
A is the Final Investment Value
P is the Principal amount of money to be invested
r is the rate of interest in decimal
t is Number of Time Periods
n is the number of times interest is compounded per year
in this problem we have
substitute in the formula above
B because it's not putting the blame on anyone. It is completely unbiased and objective.
Answer:
If we reject the null hypothesis based on the evidence, then our conclusion should be Option c.
If we do not reject the null hypothesis based on the evidence, then our conclusion should be Option a.
Step-by-step explanation:
We are given that the FDA wants to set up a hypothesis test to show that the new drug is safe before approving it by assuming it to be unsafe.
So, Null hypothesis,
= New drug is unsafe
Alternate Hypothesis,
= New drug is safe
<em>Now, if we reject the null hypothesis based on the evidence, then our conclusion should be that : </em>
There is sufficient evidence to believe that the new drug is safe because rejecting null hypothesis means that alternate hypothesis is accepted with required evidence.
<em>And If we do not reject the null hypothesis based on the evidence, then our conclusion should be that : </em>
There is insufficient evidence to believe that the new drug is safe because not rejecting null hypothesis means that we are not ready with enough evidence to assume that new drug is safe.