Help me do it please, I'm stuck. ​

Answer:

42,996

Step-by-step explanation:

3*16+4*25+2*33=48+100+66=214

Answer:

1,664 fluid ounces = 13 gallons

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

fifty nine hundredths

Answer:

x= 7/4

Step-by-step explanation:

Find the LCM for x-2,x+3,x^2+x-6 which is (x-2) (x+3)

then multiply

Answer:

1) Binomial distribution with n=5 and p=0.84.

2) Attached. Skewed.

3) C. Skewed right

4) The values 0 and 1 would be unusual because the associated probabilities are lower than 0.3%.

Step-by-step explanation:

1) A binomial distribution for this case can be constructed with the parameters n=5 and p=0.84.

The probability of k adults from the sample respond Yes is:

[tex]P(x=k) = \dbinom{n}{k} p^{k}(1-p)^{n-k}=\dbinom{5}{k} 0.84^{k}\cdot 0.16^{5-k}[/tex]

[tex]P(x=0) = \dbinom{5}{0} p^{0}(1-p)^{5}=1*1*0.0001=0.0001\\\\\\P(x=1) = \dbinom{5}{1} p^{1}(1-p)^{4}=5*0.84*0.0007=0.0028\\\\\\P(x=2) = \dbinom{5}{2} p^{2}(1-p)^{3}=10*0.7056*0.0041=0.0289\\\\\\P(x=3) = \dbinom{5}{3} p^{3}(1-p)^{2}=10*0.5927*0.0256=0.1517\\\\\\P(x=4) = \dbinom{5}{4} p^{4}(1-p)^{1}=5*0.4979*0.16=0.3983\\\\\\P(x=5) = \dbinom{5}{5} p^{5}(1-p)^{0}=1*0.4182*1=0.4182\\\\\\[/tex]

2) The graph is attached.

The shape is skewed to the right. This is due to the value of p being close to 1.

The sample space is [0,1,2,3,4,5] and the biggest values have the highest probabilities.

3) The shape is skewed right.

4) The values 0 and 1 would be unusual because the associated probabilities are lower than 0.3%.

The value k=2 can also be considered unusual as it has an associated probability of 2.8%.

Answer:

(-21a^5×b)/(2+4b)

Step by step explanation:

The question isn't complete and clear as we were not told what to determine from the expression.

Looking at the question, we can tell we are to simplify the expression.

[(-7a² × 9a³x³) :(-3ax³)] : [( 10a) -(-20a b) : (-5a²b)]

First we would work with expressions in each parenthesis (bracket).

Then we would work on the answer we derive after opening the parenthesis.

See attachment for detail

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

Hello!

The researcher developed a treatment to teach social skills to youth offenders. To test if the treatment is effective in increasing empathy compared to the standard treatment she randomly selected a group of 9 offenders and applied the new treatment and to another group of 9 randomly selected youth offenders, she applied the standard treatment. (Note: the data corresponds to two samples of 9 units each, so I've used those sizes to conduct the test)

At the end of the treatment, she administers BES to measure their empathy levels. Her claim is that the offenders that received the new treatment will have higher BES scores than those who received the standard treatment.

1) Using the records obtained for both groups, she  intends to conduct an independent t-test to analyze her claim.

X₁: BES results of a youth offender treated with the new treatment.

X₂: BES results of a youth offender treated with the standard treatment.

H₀: μ₁ = μ₂

H₁: μ₁ ≠ μ₂

α:0.05

test statistic

[tex]t_{H_0}= -0.32[/tex]

p-value: 0.7517

The p-value is greater than the significance level so the decision is to not reject the null hypothesis. This means that at a 5% significance level you can conclude that there is no difference between the mean BES scores of the youth offenders treated with the new treatment and the mean BES score of  the youth offenders treated with the standard treatment. The new treatment doesn't increase the levels of social empathy of the youth offenders.

I hope this helps

(Box plot in attachment)

Answer:

a) [tex] \mu_m -\mu_a [/tex]

[tex]\bar X_{m}=4.1[/tex] represent the mean for the morning

[tex]\bar X_{a}=3.7[/tex] represent the mean for the afternoon

[tex]s_{m}=0.7[/tex] represent the sample standard deviation for the morning

[tex]s_{a}=0.5[/tex] represent the sample standard deviation for afternoon

[tex]n_{m}=49[/tex] sample size for the morning

[tex]n_{a}=54[/tex] sample size for the afternoon

b) Null hypothesis:[tex]\mu_{m} \leq \mu_{a}[/tex]

Alternative hypothesis:[tex]\mu_{m} > \mu_{a}[/tex]

c) [tex] t_{\alpha}= 1.66[/tex]

d) [tex]t=\frac{4.1-3.7}{\sqrt{\frac{0.7^2}{49}+\frac{0.5^2}{54}}}}=3.307[/tex]  

The p value would be:

[tex]p_v =P(t_{101}>3.307)=0.00065[/tex]

e) Since the calculated value is higher than the critical value we have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis and we can conclude that the mean for people in the morning have a mean exercise time is greater than the mean for those who work out in the afternoon or evening at the 5% of significance

Step-by-step explanation:

Part a

[tex]\bar X_{m}=4.1[/tex] represent the mean for the morning

[tex]\bar X_{a}=3.7[/tex] represent the mean for the afternoon

[tex]s_{m}=0.7[/tex] represent the sample standard deviation for the morning

[tex]s_{a}=0.5[/tex] represent the sample standard deviation for afternoon

[tex]n_{m}=49[/tex] sample size for the morning

[tex]n_{a}=54[/tex] sample size for the afternoon

t would represent the statistic

[tex]\alpha=0.05[/tex] significance level

The parameter of interest is:

[tex] \mu_m -\mu_a [/tex]

Part b

We want to verify if the people who exercise in the morning have a mean exercise time greater than those who work out in the afternoon or evening, the system of hypothesis would be:

Null hypothesis:[tex]\mu_{m} \leq \mu_{a}[/tex]

Alternative hypothesis:[tex]\mu_{m} > \mu_{a}[/tex]

The statistic is given by:

[tex]t=\frac{\bar X_{m}-\bar X_{a}}{\sqrt{\frac{s^2_{m}}{n_{m}}+\frac{s^2_{a}}{n_{a}}}}[/tex] (1)

Part c

Based on the significance level[tex]\alpha=0.05[/tex] and the degrees of freedom given by:

[tex] df = 49+54-2= 101[/tex]

We can find the critical value in the t distribution iwth 101 degrees of freedom who accumuate 0.05 of the area in the right and we got:

[tex] t_{\alpha}= 1.66[/tex]

Part d

[tex]t=\frac{4.1-3.7}{\sqrt{\frac{0.7^2}{49}+\frac{0.5^2}{54}}}}=3.307[/tex]  

The p value would be:

[tex]p_v =P(t_{101}>3.307)=0.00065[/tex]

Part e

Since the calculated value is higher than the critical value we have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis and we can conclude that the mean for people in the morning have a mean exercise time is greater than the mean for those who work out in the afternoon or evening at the 5% of significance

Answer: Liquid B is warmer.

Step-by-step explanation:

The data that we have is:

Temperature A = -105.4° C

Temperature B = -10.83° C

We want to know which liquid is warmer, this is equivalent to see which temperature is bigger, Ta or Tb.

Now, you can see that temperature A is larger in module, but this is a negative number.

When we work with negative numbers, the bigger ones are the ones closer to zero. This means that for example, -1 is larger than - 150.

From this, we can conclude that Liquid B is warmer.

Another way to see it is with a change of units.

If we have A degrees Celcius, and we want to to transform it into Kelvins, we must add 273.15°.

Then we have:

Ta = (-105.4° + 273.15°) K = 167.75 K

Tb = (-10.83 ´273.15°) = 262.35 K

where you can see that liquid B has a larger temperature.

Answer:

Liq A= -105.4ºC < LiqB= -10.83ºC

Step-by-step explanation:

Hello!

The easiest and quickest way to compare two negative values and determine which one is greater is by sorting them in a number line. (Check attachment)

You can also compare the absolute value of the temperature measurements. |10.83| < |105.4|. As the negative value decrease, the absolute value increases.

So the temperature of Liquid B > Temperature of liquid A.

I hope this helps!

Answer:

18

Step-by-step explanation:

Even if we both break down tonight

And you say you hate me

And we go to bed angry

I know everything will be alright

I'll be here waiting

I promise I'm changing

I just need

A little time to show you I'm worth it

I know that I can be a difficult person

I'm a stress case drive you up the wall when I'm workin'

Actually I'm prolly worse when I'm not you don't deserve it

Make you nervous 'cause you know I'ma break soon

Every time I do I say something that hurts you

Actin' like I'm gone, but we both in the same room

I don't like to be wrong which I know you relate to

And I know I make you feel like you're at the end of your road

That's when I look at you and tell you I'd be better alone

That's just the pride talkin' isn't it cause both of us know

Answer:

I think it changed from 36x to 48x

Depending on how you look at it, it could have changed from 3x to 4x or 36x to 48x.

If they said it was 18 feet instead of 18 inches, it would be 3x or 4x, but they had it as inches.

18 inches = 1.5 feet

72/1.5 = 48

54/1.5 = 36

So originally, it would have been a scale of 1 in : 36in , but it changed to 1 in : 48 in  

Sorry if this was confusing.

Answer:

One inch represented 3 feet in the first scale, but now 1 inch now represents 4 feet in the second scale. Otherwise known as D

I got 100% on my quiz.

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

combination

Step-by-step explanation:

We have that permutations are groupings in which the order of the objects matters. Combinations are groupings where content matters but order does not.

In this case we have a list of ingredients for the pizza, therefore the order does not matter as long as the ingredients are indicated, which means that this is an example of a combination.

Answer:

(See explanation below for further details)

Step-by-step explanation:

Any point in rectangular form can be described in terms of radius and angle of the circle. That is:

[tex]P = (r\cdot \cos \theta, r\cdot \sin \theta)[/tex]

Since circunference is divided into 8 equal parts, the point can be modelled as:

[tex]P = (r\cdot \cos \frac{2\pi\cdot n}{8}, r \cdot \sin \frac{2\pi\cdot n}{8} )[/tex]

The approximate radian and degree values for one circle are:

Radians

[tex]0 (0), \frac{\pi}{4} (0.785), \frac{\pi}{2} (1.571), \frac{3\pi}{4} (2.355), \pi (3.142), \frac{5\pi}{4} (3.925), \frac{3\pi}{2} (4.71), \frac{7\pi}{4} (5.495), 2\pi (6.280)[/tex]

Degrees

[tex]0^{\circ}, 45^{\circ}, 90^{\circ}, 135^{\circ}, 180^{\circ}, 225^{\circ}, 270^{\circ}, 315^{\circ}, 360^{\circ}[/tex]

Answer:

(19-3)*5 = 80

Step-by-step explanation:

(19-3)*5 = 80

Parentheses first

16*5 = 80

80

Answer: (19 - 3) * 5 = 80

Check to see if this is right.

(19 - 3) * 5 = 80

16 * 5 = 80

80 = 80

Best of Luck!

The different transformations have been matched to their respective operations below.

Parent function is given as: f(x) = 2x - 6

Thus, the transformations are:

When f(x) shifts 4 units down, we have;

f(x) → f(x) - 4

⇒ g(x)= 2x - 6 - 4 = 2x - 10

When it stretches f(x) by a factor of 4 away from the x-axis;

f(x) → 4*f(x)

⇒ g(x) = 4(2x - 6) = 8x - 24

When it shifts f(x) 4 units right;

f(x) → f(x - 4)

⇒ g(x) = 2(x - 4) - 6 = 2x - 14

When it compresses f(x) by a factor of 4 toward the y-axis;

f(x) → f(4x)

⇒ g(x) = 2*4x - 6 = 8x - 6

Read more about Transformations at; https://brainly.com/question/4289712

#SPJ1

Answer:

Population: all company employees.

Sample: arrival times of the employees during the data collection.

Step-by-step explanation:

In this case, the population is the group about which the company wants to estimate a parameter (proportion of employees who are at least 1 minute late for work). This group is all employees of the company.

The sample is comprised of the arrival times of the individuals who went to work during the data collection by the entry time recording machine. The proportion of the sample is calculated on these arrival times, with which the proportion of the population will be inferred.

Answer:

1899

Step-by-step explanation:

The Empirical Rule states that, for a normally distributed random variable:

68% of the measures are within 1 standard deviation of the mean.

95% of the measures are within 2 standard deviation of the mean.

99.7% of the measures are within 3 standard deviations of the mean.

In this problem, we have that:

Mean = 3234

Standard deviation = 871

Percentage of newborns who weighed between 1492 grams and 4976 grams:

1492 = 3234 - 2*871

So 1492 is two standard deviations below the mean.

4976 = 3234 + 2*871

So 4976 is two standard deviations above the mean.

By the Empirical Rule, 95% of newborns weighed between 1492 grams and 4976 grams.

Out of 1999:

0.95*1999 = 1899

So the answer is 1899

Answer:

[tex] |T- 98.6| \geq 3[/tex]

And in order to solve this we have two possibilities:

Solution 1

[tex] T -98.6 \leq -3[/tex]

And solving for T we got:

[tex] T \leq 98.6- 3[/tex]

[tex] T\leq 95.6[/tex]

Solution 2

And the other options would be:

[tex] T -98.6 \geq 3[/tex]

[tex] T \geq 101.6[/tex]

Step-by-step explanation:

For this case we can define the variable os interest T as the real temperature and we know that if we are 3 F more than the value of 98.6 we will be unhealthy so we can set up the following equation:

[tex] |T- 98.6| \geq 3[/tex]

And in order to solve this we have two possibilities:

Solution 1

[tex] T -98.6 \leq -3[/tex]

And solving for T we got:

[tex] T \leq 98.6- 3[/tex]

[tex] T\leq 95.6[/tex]

Solution 2

And the other options would be:

[tex] T -98.6 \geq 3[/tex]

[tex] T \geq 101.6[/tex]

Answer:

565.71 yd²

Step-by-step explanation:

Surface area = [tex]2 \pi r (r+h)[/tex]

Area = 2 × 22/7 × 6 (6 + 9)

Area = 22 × 12/7 × 15

Area = 565.71 yd²

Answer:

565.71 yd²

Step-by-step explanation:

Surface area =

Area = 2 × 22/7 × 6 (6 + 9)

Area = 22 × 12/7 × 15

Area = 565.71 yd²

Answer:

B. h(x) = 2x^2 - 3x + 3

Step-by-step explanation:

Given

f(x)=3x+5

g(x)=2x^2 - 6x - 2

h(x) is sum of the functions f(x) and g(x)

Thus,

h(x) = f(x) + g(x)

substituting value of f(x) and g(x) as given above we have

h(x) = 3x+5 + 2x^2 - 6x - 2

as ( 3x - 6x = -3x and 5- 2 = 3) , we have

h(x) = 2x^2 -3x + 3

Thus, correct answer is option  B. h(x) = 2x^2 - 3x + 3.

Answer:

A

Step-by-step explanation:

i got it right on the exam

Answer:

Option B.

Step-by-step explanation:

Let the radius of the snare drum = r

and radius of the model = R

Ratio of the dimensions of the snare drum and the model = 1 : 4

So, [tex]\frac{r}{R}=\frac{1}{4}[/tex]

Now as per question, dimensions of the snare drum is multiplied by a scale factor of [tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]

Radius of the snare drum = [tex]\frac{r}{2}[/tex]

Ratio of the radius of the snare drum and cylindrical model ,

[tex]\frac{\frac{r}{2}}{R} =\frac{1}{4}[/tex]

[tex]\frac{r}{2R}=\frac{1}{4}[/tex]

[tex]\frac{r}{R}=\frac{1}{2}[/tex]

Therefore, the cylinder with Sara's dimensions will be geometrically similar but the scale factor will be 1 : 2

Option B is the answer.

Answer:

  14 ft

Step-by-step explanation:

After the sides are folded up, the depth of the box is 2 ft, so the area of the square bottom is ...

  (200 ft^2)/(2 ft) = 100 ft^2

The edge dimension of the bottom is then ...

  √(100 ft^2) = 10 ft

Each side adds 2+2=4 ft to the bottom dimension in each direction, so the original square piece of metal was 14 ft square.

Answer:

Below.

Step-by-step explanation:

Yes - those are 2 semicircles so their combined area = πr^2

= 3^2π

= 9π.

Yes.. You can count it as full circle.

Answer:

3.9 squre inch

Step-by-step explanation:

Two semicircles are inscribed in a square of side 6 in. Both the semicircles if combined together will form a full circle.

Area of the yellow region would be half of the areas of the difference between area of square and area of two semicircles each with radius 3 inches.

Therefore,

Area of yellow region

[tex] = \frac{1}{2} (area \: of \: square - 2 \times area \: of \: semicircle) \\ \\ = \frac{1}{2} ( {6}^{2} - 2 \times \frac{1}{2} \pi {r}^{2} ) \\ \\ = \frac{1}{2} ( {6}^{2} - 3.14 \times {3}^{2} ) \\ \\ = \frac{1}{2} ( 36 - 3.14 \times 9 ) \\ \\ = \frac{1}{2} ( 36 - 28.26 ) \\ \\ = \frac{1}{2} \times 7.74 \\ \\ = 3.87 \: {in}^{2} \\ \\ = 3.9 \: {in}^{2}[/tex]

Answer:

So the z-scores that separate the unusual IQ scores from those that are​ usual are Z = -2 and Z = 2.

The IQ scores that separate the unusual IQ scores from those that are​ usual are 84 and 148.

Step-by-step explanation:

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

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

[tex]Z = \frac{X - \mu}{\sigma}[/tex]

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.

In this question, we have that:

[tex]\mu = 116, \sigma = 16[/tex]

What are the z scores that separate the unusual IQ scores from those that are​ usual?

If Z<-2 or Z > 2, the IQ score is unusual.

So the z-scores that separate the unusual IQ scores from those that are​ usual are Z = -2 and Z = 2.

What are the IQ scores that separate the unusual IQ scores from those that are​ usual?

Those IQ scores are X when Z = -2 and X when Z = 2. So

Z = -2

[tex]Z = \frac{X - \mu}{\sigma}[/tex]

[tex]-2 = \frac{X - 116}{16}[/tex]

[tex]X - 116 = -2*16[/tex]

[tex]X = 84[/tex]

Z = 2

[tex]Z = \frac{X - \mu}{\sigma}[/tex]

[tex]2 = \frac{X - 116}{16}[/tex]

[tex]X - 116 = 2*16[/tex]

[tex]X = 148[/tex]

The IQ scores that separate the unusual IQ scores from those that are​ usual are 84 and 148.

Answer:

[tex]\mu -2*\sigma = 116-2*16= 84[/tex]

[tex]\mu +2*\sigma = 116+2*16= 148[/tex]

Step-by-step explanation:

We know that the distirbution for the IQ have the following parameters:

[tex]\mu=116, \sigma=16[/tex]

The z score is given by this formula

[tex] z = \frac{X -\mu}{\sigma}[/tex]

And replacing the limits we got:

[tex] X = \mu \pm z \sigma[/tex]

For this case we know that a value to be unusual if its z score is less than minus2 or greater than​ 2, so then we can find the limits with this formulas:

[tex]\mu -2*\sigma = 116-2*16= 84[/tex]

[tex]\mu +2*\sigma = 116+2*16= 148[/tex]

Answer:

A

Step-by-step explanation:

Since chi-squared calculated value is greater than p-value, there is a relationship between vaccine location and severe reaction.

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

This survey is testing for an association between the vaccine location and severe reactions using the chi-square test of independence.

Null hypothesis: Vaccine location and severe reactions are independent

Alternative: Vaccine location and severe reactions are not independent

With a chi square test statistic of 2.0609 with a P value of 0.1511. Using the p- value in comparison to either α = 0.05 or 0.01, the pediatricians can fail to reject the null as the p-value is greater than 0.05 or 0.01 and can conclude that there is a statistically significant association between vaccine location and severe reaction.

This approach was appropriate because the sampling method was simple random sampling, the variables that were under study were categorical, and the expected frequency count was at least 5 in all values to be able to reach  value of 283 and 289.

Answer:

5.75 ft ≈ 6 ft

2.47 ft ≈ 2 ft

perimeter of the rectangular counter top  = 16 ft

Step-by-step explanation:

The counter top he is installing is a rectangular piece of quartz that is 5.75 ft long and 2.47 ft wide. The length and the width can be rounded off to the nearest whole number as follows.

length = 5.75 ft to the nearest whole number will be 6 ft

width = 2.47 ft to the nearest whole number will be 2 ft

The logic in rounding off the number to the nearest whole number is that the value on the left hand side of the decimal is rounded off to an integer. If the number at the right hand side of the number is greater or equal to 5 we borrow 1 and add to the left hand side number of the decimal number.

Therefore,

Perimeter of the rectangle = 2l + 2w

perimeter of the rectangle = 2 × 6 + 2 × 2

perimeter of the rectangle = 12 + 4

perimeter of the rectangle = 16 ft

Answer:

Below.

Step-by-step explanation:

sin ((x))-(y)) / cos (x) sin (y)

    sin x cos y - cos x sin y

=  ----------------------------------

           cos x sin y

     sin x cos y

=    ----------------   -   1

     cos x sin y

But tan x = sin x / cos x  and cot y = cos y / sin y

So the above =  tan x cot y - 1.