Answer:
We <em>fail to reject H₀ </em>as there is insufficient evidence at 0.5% level of significance to conclude that the mean hours of TV watched per day differs from the claim.
Step-by-step explanation:
This is a two-tailed test.
We first need to calculate the test statistic. The test statistic is calculated as follows:
Z_calc = X - μ₀ / (s /√n)
where
- X is the mean number of hours
- μ₀ is the mean that the sociologist claims is true
- s is the standard deviation
- n is the sample size
Therefore,
Z_calc = (3.02 - 3) / (2.64 /√(1326))
= 0.2759
Now we have to calculate the z-value. The z-value is calculated as follows:
z_α/2 = z_(0.05/2) = z_0.025
Using the p-value method:
P = 1 - α/2
= 1 - 0.025
= 0.975
Thus, using the positive z-table, you will find that the z-value is
1.96.
Therefore, we reject H₀ if | Z_calc | > z_(α/2)
Thus, since
| Z_calc | < 1.96, we <em>fail to reject H₀ </em>as there is insufficient evidence at 0.5% level of significance to conclude that the mean hours of TV watched per day differs from the claim.
(1) Equation of the parabola:
Steps:
We know the span 456 m and max height is 38 m. Since the parabola is symmetric around the vertical going through the maximum point, we know half the span, or 228 m to the left and right from the origin are the zeros of the function. We can place the parabola centered around the origin. Also, since it is an arch, the parabola is upside down, so the coefficient at x^2 is negative:
The vertex is at (0,38), and the positive zero at (228,0). That is enough to determine A and B:
(2) height 204 m from the center: 7.58 m
Steps:
Height at 204 m off the center (either direction) can be calculated by plugging in x=204 into the above equation:
D for sure hope it helps
plz give brainliest
Answer:
Sarita is wrong, the correct equation is
Step-by-step explanation:
we know that
The equation of a line in slope intercept form is equal to
we have
substitute in the equation
Solve for m
substitute
therefore
Sarita is wrong