Answer: its false
Step-by-step explanation:
Answer
Where is the picture
Step-by-step explanation:
First, solve the parentheses:
Next, the exponential terms
Solve the multiplication:
Add and subtract:
Answer:
44x +56y = 95
Step-by-step explanation:
To write the equation of the perpendicular bisector, we need to know the midpoint and we need to know the differences of the coordinates.
The midpoint is the average of the coordinate values:
((-2.5, -2) +(3, 5))/2 = (0.5, 3)/2 = (0.25, 1.5) = (h, k)
The differences of the coordinates are ...
(3, 5) -(-2.5, -2) = (3 -(-2.5), 5 -(-2)) = (5.5, 7) = (Δx, Δy)
Then the perpendicular bisector equation can be written ...
Δx(x -h) +Δy(y -k) = 0
5.5(x -0.25) +7(y -1.5) = 0
5.5x -1.375 +7y -10.5 = 0
Multiplying by 8 and subtracting the constant, we get ...
44x +56y = 95 . . . . equation of the perpendicular bisector
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.