Step-by-step explanation:
The coefficient of the x term repesents the slope of the graph.
So we have y = 2x +- ( ).
We have to find our number term, so let's substitute x = 4 and y = 3.
(3) = 2(4) +- ( )
3 = 8 +- ( )
To make this right, the number term must be -5.
3 = 8 - 5
So the equation is y = 2x - 5.
Answer: Choice B
There is not convincing evidence because the interval contains 0.
========================================================
Explanation:
The confidence interval is (-0.29, 0.09)
This is the same as writing -0.29 < p1-p1 < 0.09
The thing we're trying to estimate (p1-p2) is between -0.29 and 0.09
Because 0 is in this interval, it is possible that p1-p1 = 0 which leads to p1 = p2.
Therefore, it is possible that the population proportions are the same.
The question asks " is there convincing evidence of a difference in the true proportions", so the answer to this is "no, there isn't convincing evidence". We would need both endpoints of the confidence interval to either be positive together, or be negative together, for us to have convincing evidence that the population proportions are different.
5/10 *2/4
Cross out 2 and 10, divide by 2. 2/2=1 , 10/2=5
5/5*1/4= 5/20
reduce the fraction
divide by 5 for the numerator and denominator
5/5=1
20/5=4
5/10*2/4=1/4
Answer: 1/4
Second option, just do Pemdas backwards.
