Answer:
Since 2.1387 is Greater Than 1.645;
we reject null hypothesis; we conclude that, the nickname is justified based on the data.
Step-by-step explanation:
Given the data in the question;
Null hypothesis H₀ : p = 0.262
Alternative Hypothesis H₁ : p > 0.262.
p" = 0.357
q = 1 - p = 1 - 0.262 = 0.738
n = 98
so;
z = (p" - p) / √(pq/n)
we substitute
z = (0.357 - 0.262) / √((0.262×0.738) / 98)
z = 0.095 / 0.04441869
z = 2.1387
at 5% CONFIDENCE INTERVAL
z-critical = 1.645
Since 2.1387 is Greater Than 1.645;
we reject null hypothesis; we conclude that, the nickname is justified based on the data.
Answer:
-35
Step-by-step explanation:
30 x 50
then
1500 divided by 15
15 - 50 =35 ;)
“Mother”, I cut my finger, said Jane.
Calibration curves <span>absorbance versus concentration may deviate from a straight line when A<0.1 and when A>1 maybe because at these values the substances react to light differently which will cause it to not follow a linear graph. Hope this helps. Have a nice day.</span>
We know that
if the dilated circle <span>passes through the point (4, 0)
so
the new radius is the distance from the origin to point (4,0)
d=</span>√[(4-0)²+0²]-----> d=√16------> d=4 units
the new radius is 4 units
original radius is 1 units
[new radius]=[scale]*[original radius]
scale=new radius/original radius-----> scale=4/1-----> 4
the answer is
<span>the scale factor of dilation is 4</span>