Answer:
it's D
Step-by-step explanation:
i just put it into desmos and looked for points, none of the answers appeared, therefore it's D
Answer:
22% reduction
Step-by-step explanation:
Find the percent decrease by dividing the difference in amounts by the original amount.
Find the difference:
115 - 90 = 25
Divide this by the original amount:
25/115
= 0.217
So, the percent decrease is 21.7%. Round this to the nearest whole percentage:
= 22
The percent reduction in fuel used was approx. 22%
Answer:
The null hypothesis is: u >= 1300 KN/m^2
And the alternative hypothesis is:
u < 1300 KN/m^2.
Step-by-step explanation:
The null hypothesis describes hat there is no difference or assiciation between variables of a specific population or that it is a particular average value while the alternative hypothesis states otherwise.
In this case study, the null hypothesis is: u >= 1300 KN/m^2
And the alternative hypothesis is:
u < 1300 KN/m^2.
The answer is D, x=12. There's a lot of little math involved but hope it helps!!
Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:
Given that a medical study investigated the effect of calcium and vitamin supplements on the risk of older Americans for broken bones. A total of 389 older Americans who lived at home and were in good health were studied over a three-year period. While all of the 389 people took in at least 700 milligrams of calcium and 200 units of vitamin D through their normal diet, 187 of them were given additional supplements containing 500 milligrams of calcium citrate and 70 units of vitamin D daily. Of the 187 who took additional supplements, 11 of them suffered broken bones over the three-year period. Of the 202 older Americans who did not take the additional supplement, 26 of them suffered broken bones over the study period.
Group I Group II Total
n 187 202 389
favour x 11 26 37
The fraction of older Americans who were included in the study suffered broken bones during the three-year period
=Total x/total n
= 