I'm assuming all of (x^2+9) is in the denominator. If that assumption is correct, then,
One possible answer is
Another possible answer is
There are many ways to do this. The idea is that when we have f( g(x) ), we basically replace every x in f(x) with g(x)
So in the first example above, we would have
In that third step, g(x) was replaced with x^2+9 since g(x) = x^2+9.
Similar steps will happen with the second example as well (when g(x) = x^2)
Answer:
There is not sufficient evidence to support the claim that there is a linear correlation between the heights and pulse rates of women
Step-by-step explanation:
The correlation coefficient between the variables h(height in inches) and pulse rates (in beats per minute) is 0.202
Sample size n=40
Level of significane alpha = 0.01
Create null and alternate hypothesis as:
H0: r=0
Ha: r not equal 0
(Two tailed test at 1% significance level)
Sample r = 0.202
r difference = 0.202
test statistic t =
df =n-2 =38
t critical value for 0.01 and df =38 is 2.704
Since our test statistic lies below 2.704, we accept null hypothesis
There is not sufficient evidence to support the claim that there is a linear correlation between the heights and pulse rates of women