All categories

2 years ago

Help. Do not take advantage of the points, please.

Mathematics

2 answers:

Arte-miy333 [17]2 years ago

8 0

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

natka813 [3]2 years ago

5 0

Answer:

Umm what's the question

You might be interested in

Please hurry

Studentka2010 [4]

Answer:

D 45.6 Square centimetres

Step-by-step explanation:

8 cm time 5.7 cm

8 0

2 years ago

if a dog food costs 0.75 per pound, and dog bones cost 1.75 each, what is the cost of 2 bones and 25 pounds of dog food?

Studentka2010 [4]

Answer:

2 bones and 25 pounds of dog food would cost $22.25

Step-by-step explanation:

5 0

2 years ago

a group of hikers begin in an elevation of -29 feet below sea level. they travel up a mountain side until they were on an elevat

katovenus [111]

Answer:

-28

Step-by-step explanation:

7 0

2 years ago

Divide the number 720 into the following Ratios 2:1:3 5:4

solmaris [256]

Answer:

Ratio 1 = a(240

=b)120

=c)360

Ratio 2=a)400

=b)320

Step-by-step explanation:

On both of the ratios you first add them then divide one by one like this for example 2+1+3= 6

then 2/6 ÷720 = 120 ×2 =240 then you do this to the other numbers as well.

6 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

2. The National Safety Council routinely analyzes the benefit of seat belt use on driver safety. Their data showed that among 28

JulijaS [17]

Answer:

We conclude that there is difference in the proportion of deaths between the 2 groups.

Step-by-step explanation:

We are given that among 2823 drivers not wearing seat belts, 31 died as a result of injuries, and among 7765 drivers wearing seat belts 16 were killed.

Let $p_1$ = proportion of deaths when drivers were not wearing seat belts.

$p_2$ = proportion of deaths when drivers were wearing seat belts.

So, Null Hypothesis, $H_0$ : $p_1=p_2$ {means that there is no difference in the proportion of deaths between the 2 groups}

Alternate Hypothesis, $H_A$ : $p_1\neq p_2$ {means that there is difference in the proportion of deaths between the 2 groups}

The test statistics that would be used here Two-sample z test for proportions;

T.S. = $\frac{(\hat p_1-\hat p_2)-(p_1-p_2)}{\sqrt{\frac{\hat p_1(1-\hat p_1)}{n_1}+\frac{\hat p_2(1-\hat p_2)}{n_2} } }$ ~ N(0,1)

where, $\hat p_1$ = sample proportion of deaths when drivers were not wearing seat belts = $\frac{31}{2823}$ = 0.011

$\hat p_2$ = sample proportion of deaths when drivers were wearing seat belts = $\frac{16}{7765}$ = 0.002

$n_1$ = sample of drivers not wearing seat belts = 2823

$n_2$ = sample of drivers wearing seat belts = 7765

So, the test statistics = $\frac{(0.011-0.002)-(0)}{\sqrt{\frac{0.011(1-0.011)}{2823}+\frac{0.002(1-0.002)}{7765} } }$

= 4.438

The value of z test statistics is 4.438.

Now, at 5% significance level the z table gives critical values of -1.96 and 1.96 for two-tailed test.

Since our test statistic doesn't lie within the range of critical values of z, so we have sufficient evidence to reject our null hypothesis as it will fall in the rejection region due to which we reject our null hypothesis.

Therefore, we conclude that there is difference in the proportion of deaths between the 2 groups.

Also, Margin of error (E) = $1.96 \times \sqrt{\frac{\hat p_1(1-\hat p_1)}{n_1}+\frac{\hat p_2(1-\hat p_2)}{n_2} }$

= $1.96 \times \sqrt{\frac{0.011(1-0.011)}{2823}+\frac{0.002(1-0.002)}{7765} }$

= 0.00397

5 0

2 years ago