Slope = (-3+4)/(0+5) = 1/5
passing (-2,2)
y = mx +b
2 = 1/5(-2) + b
2 = -2/5 + b
so b = 2 +2/5 = 12/5
equation
y = 1/5x + 12/5
answer is B y = 1/5x + 12/5
<h3>
Answer: Choice B</h3>
No, this is not a plausible value for the population mean, because 5 is not within the 95% confidence interval.
====================================================
Explanation:
The greek letter mu is the population mean. It has the symbol
which looks like the letter 'u' but with a tail at the front or left side.
The question is asking if mu = 5 is plausible if the researcher found the 95% confidence interval to be 5.2 < mu < 7.8
We see that 5 is <u>not</u> in that interval. It's a bit to the left of 5.2
Since mu = 5 is not in the interval, it's not a plausible value for the population mean.
Have we ruled it out with 100% confidence? No. Such a thing is not possible. There's always room for (slight) error. The researcher would need to do a census to be fully confident; however, such practices are very time consuming and expensive. This is the main reason why statistics is important to try to estimate the population with a sample.
In my opinion the answer is <span>m2 – 100 = –99
proof
</span>m2 – 100 =<span>(m – 10)(m + 10)
for eg. m=1, </span>(-9)(11)= <span>–99</span>
If these four line segments are connected (kind of like a square) then only 4 endpoints are needed, but if they are all separate line segments, then you would need a maximum of 8 endpoints because any line segment has 2 endpoints and 4 line segments with 2 endpoints a piece equals 8 endpoints in total.
I hope this helped! :)