I am stuck on this problem. An thorough explanation would help lots!

For bone density scores that are normally distributed with a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1, find the percentage of sc

gogolik [260]

Answer:

a) The percentage of bone density scores that are significantly high is 2.28%

b) The percentage of bone density scores that are significantly low is 2.28%

c) The percentage of bone density scores that are not significant is 95.44%

Step-by-step explanation:

Problems of normally distributed samples are solved using the z-score formula.

In a set with mean $\mu$ and standard deviation $\sigma$ , the zscore of a measure X is given by:

$Z = \frac{X - \mu}{\sigma}$

The Z-score measures how many standard deviations the measure is from the mean. After finding the Z-score, we look at the z-score table and find the p-value associated with this z-score. This p-value is the probability that the value of the measure is smaller than X, that is, the percentile of X. Subtracting 1 by the pvalue, we get the probability that the value of the measure is greater than X.

a. significantly high (or at least 2 standard deviations above the mean).

This is 1 subtracted by the pvalue of Z = 2.

Z = 2 has a pvalue of 0.9772

1 - 0.9772 = 0.0228

2.28% of scores are signifcantly high

b. significantly low (or at least 2 standard deviations below the mean).

pvalue of Z = -2

Z = -2 has a pvalue of 0.0228

2.28% of scores are signicantly low.

c. not significant (or less than 2 standard deviations away from the mean).

pvalue of Z = 2 subtracted by the pvalue of Z = -2.

Z = 2 has a pvalue of 0.9772

Z = -2 has a pvalue of 0.0228

0.9772 - 0.0228 = 0.9544

95.44% of the scores are not significant

7 0

4 years ago

5. While working out, Susie doos 25 sit-ups for every 12 push-ups. If she does 00 push-ups, how

Norma-Jean [14]

2500 is the answer ...

3 0

3 years ago

What is the image of (6,-2) under the translation (x,y) (x-5,y-8)

german

The new point would then be at (1, -10)

6 0

3 years ago

Giá trị x thoả mãn x(x − 3) + x − 3 =0 là

svet-max [94.6K]

Here we will use the trial and error method.

We will try putting different values of x.

$\begin{gathered}\\ \sf\longmapsto 1(1-3)+1-3=0\end{gathered}$

$\begin{gathered}\\ \sf\longmapsto (-2)+1-3=0\end{gathered}$

$\begin{gathered}\\ \sf\longmapsto -2+1-3=0\end{gathered}$

$\begin{gathered}\\ \sf\longmapsto -2-2=0\end{gathered}$

$\begin{gathered}\\ \sf\longmapsto -4≠0\end{gathered}$

$\begin{gathered}\\ \sf\longmapsto 2(2-3)+2-3=0\end{gathered}$

$\begin{gathered}\\ \sf\longmapsto 2(-1)+2-3=0\end{gathered}$

$\begin{gathered}\\ \sf\longmapsto -2+2-3=0\end{gathered}$

$\begin{gathered}\\ \sf\longmapsto -3≠0\end{gathered}$

<h2>Again,</h2><h3>x=3</h3>

$\begin{gathered}\\ \sf\longmapsto 3(3-3)+3-3=0\end{gathered}$

$\begin{gathered}\\ \sf\longmapsto 3(3-3)=0\end{gathered}$

$\begin{gathered}\\ \sf\longmapsto 3×0=0\end{gathered}$

$\begin{gathered}\\ \sf\longmapsto 0=0\end{gathered}$

<h3>☣Hence, The value of X as 3 satisfies the equation!</h3>

5 0

3 years ago

Consider the following proposed proof by contradiction that for all positive integers n, 3n > 2.

laila [671]

Answer:

The proof contains a simple direct proof, wrapped inside the unnecessary logical packaging of a proof by contradiction framework.

Step-by-step explanation:

The proof is rigourous and well written, so we discard the second answer.

This is not a fake proof by contradiction: it does not have any logical fallacies (circular arguments) or additional assumptions, like, for example, the "proof" of "All the horses are the same color". It is factually correct, but it can be rewritten as a direct proof.

A meaningful proof by contradiction depends strongly on the assumption that the statement to prove is false. In this argument, we only this assumption once, thus it is innecessary. Other proofs by contradiction, like the proof of "The square root of 2 is irrational" or Euclid's proof of the infinitude of primes, develop a longer argument based on the new assumption, but this proof doesn't.

To rewrite this without the superfluous framework, erase the parts "Suppose that the statement is false" and "The fact that the statement is true contradicts the assumption that the statement is false. Thus, the assumption that the statement was false must have been false. Thus, the statement is true."

7 0

3 years ago

I am stuck on this problem. An thorough explanation would help lots!​

I am stuck on this problem. An thorough explanation would help lots!