The correct answer to the question :) *number lines*

When n is small (less than 30), how does the shape of the t distribution compare to the normal distribution then"it is flatter and wider than the normal distribution."

<h3>What is normal distribution?</h3>

The normal distribution explains a symmetrical plot of data around the mean value, with the standard deviation defining the width of the curve. It is represented graphically as "bell curve."

Some key features regarding the normal distribution are-

The normal distribution is officially known as the Gaussian distribution, but the term "normal" was coined after scientific publications in the nineteenth century demonstrated that many natural events emerged to "deviate normally" from the mean.
The naturalist Sir Francis Galton popularized the concept of "normal variability" as the "normal curve" in his 1889 work, Natural Inheritance.
Even though the normal distribution is a crucial statistical concept, the applications in finance are limited because financial phenomena, such as expected stock-market returns, do not fit neatly within a normal distribution.
In fact, prices generally follow a right-skewed log-normal distribution with fatter tails.

As a result, relying as well heavily on the a bell curve when forecasting these events can yield unreliable results.

To know more about the normal distribution, here

brainly.com/question/23418254

#SPJ4

6 0

1 year ago

Proportional relationships, please answer all of the parts! Thank you!

Natalka [10]

Answer:

a. No (see below)

b. (see below)

c. Johnny

d. Johnny = $12.50 / hour Doug = $9.16... / hour

e. Doug: extend the table to show how much he gets paid for 1 hour of work (the unit rate)

Johnny: already on the graph

Step-by-step explanation:

a. No. This is because a proportional relationship would have a certain ratio between payment and the amount of time spent working, which would not change. However, if Doug's neighbour pays him $55 for 6 hours, it's likely that this is not a proportional relationship, or we would be able to divide $55 by the 6 hours Doug spent working.

b. Even though above I said that it's probably not a proportional relationship, if it were, we would have to divide everything equally. I'm guessing the table should look like this:

Doug

Time (hr) Earnings ($)

4 $36.66...

5 $45.8333...

6 $55

7 $64.4666....

8 $73.333...

To work out how much Doug would get for working 4 hours:

4/6 x $55 = 2/3 x $55 = $36.66... (so definitely not a proportional relationship)

To work out how much Doug would get for working 5 hours:

5/6 x $55 = $45.8333.... (more evidence that this is not a proportional relationship)

To work out how much Doug would get for working 7 hours (we already got 6 hours):

7/6 x $55 = $64.4666...

To work out how much Doug would get for working 8 hours:

8/6 x $55 = $73.33... (we could double the 4 hour payment, but this is probably more accurate)

c. Johnny is getting paid more. If we look at how much Doug gets for 6 hours, it's $55. If we look out at how much Johnny gets for 6 hours, it's $75. (If we do the same with the other amounts of time, it's the same.

4 hours: D = $36.67 vs J = $50

5 hours: D = $45.83 VS J = $60

etc...

d. Johnny gets $75 per 6 hours --> 75/6 = $12.50 per hour

Doug gets $55 per 6 hours --> 55/6 = $9.1666... per hour

e. Carry on the table for Doug all the way to 1, so you can see the how much Doug gets paid for 1 hour of work (i.e. the minimum).

The unit rate is already on the graph for Johnny.

HOPE THIS HELPED :)

P.S. Mate cld you please give me Brainliest? That table took so much dam work

7 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers