Answer:
<u>A. p(hat) = .139</u>
We divide our sample population by the amount who tested positive. 14851/107109 = .139.
<u>B. 1.62 million</u>
We just multiply the p times the population. 11.69 M * .139 = 1.62 M
<u>C. No</u>
It depends upon the sample method. From what I can tell, I assume all conditions are met and it was not biased.
If it wasn't random, that is a problem, but we aren't given this information.
We can test if it's small enough. It can't be larger than 10% of the population. 107109 * 10 < 11.69 million, so it's small enough.
We can also test if it's large enough. np and nq must be greater than 10. 107100 * .139 > 10, 107100 * .861 > 10.
The length of model is ......15 inch
if the scale factor is 1/20
it means 1/20=15/h
h=12*15=300
Answer:
A 6 lb bag of another brand
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer:
Explanation:
The row for month 25 shows that after <em>twenty-five payments</em> <u>the balance of the loan is $10,356.03</u>
You are told that the<em> loan amount or principal is $ 19,900</em>.
From those two data, you can calculate <em>how much of the principal has been paid off after </em>25 months, because the amount paid off is equal to the loan less the balance after 25 payments:
- Principal paid off = $ 19,900 - $ 10,356.03 = $9,543.97
If quarterly shrinkage (every 3 months) is 2.5%, then multiplying by $875,495 gives a value of 21887.38, or an average monthly shrinkage of 21887.38 / 3 = $7,295.79.For an employee to monitor the CCTV, it would cost ($7.5/h)(11 h/d)(30 d/m) = $2,475/month. Therefore, it is much cheaper (around 2/3 cheaper) to have an employee monitor CCTV rather than to allow the high shrinkage rate.
