Which number line represents the solution set for the inequality 2x – 6 ≥ 6(x – 2) + 8?
2 answers:
You might be interested in
Answer:
a. distance of the surveyor to the base of the building = 2051.90 ft
b. height of the building = 1384 ft
c. Angle of elevation from the surveyor to the top of the antenna = 38.31°
d. Height of antenna = 237.08 ft
Step-by-step explanation:
The picture above is a illustration of the described event.
a = the height of the flag
b = the height of the building
c = distance of the surveyor from the base of the building
the angle of elevation from the position of the surveyor on the ground to the top of the building = 34°
distance from her position to the top of the building = 2475 ft
distance from her position to the top of the flag = 2615 ft
(a) How far away from the base of the building is the surveyor located?
using the SOHCAHTOA principle
cos 34° = c/2475
c = 0.8290375726 × 2475
c = 2051.8679921
c = 2051.90 ft
(b) How tall is the building
The height of the building = b
sin 34° = opposite /hypotenuse
0.5591929035 = b/2475
b = 0.5591929035 × 2475
b = 1384.0024361
b = 1384.00 ft
(c) What is the angle of elevation from the surveyor to the top of the antenna?
let the angle = ∅
cos ∅ = adjacent/hypotenuse
cos ∅ = 2051.90/2615
cos ∅ = 0.784665392
∅ = cos-1 0.784665392
∅ = 38.310258303
∅ = 38.31°
(d) How tall is the antenna?
height of the antenna = a
sin 38.31° = opposite/hypotenuse
sin 38.31° = (a + b)/2615
sin 38.31° × 2615 = (a + b)
(a + b) = 0.6199159917 × 2615
(a + b) = 1621.0803182
(a + b) = 1621. 08 ft
Height of antenna = 1621. 08 - 1384.00 = 237.08031822 ft
Height of antenna = 237.08 ft
Answer:
We conclude that there is an equal or larger proportion of Republicans in favor of lowering the standards.
Step-by-step explanation:
<u>The complete question is</u>: A nationwide sample of influential Republicans and Democrats was asked as a part of a comprehensive survey whether they favored lowering environmental standards so that high-sulfur coal could be burned in coal-fired power plants. The results were:
Number sampled: 1,000 (republican) , 800 (democrats)
Number in favor: 200 (republican) , 168 (democrats)
At the 0.02 level of significance, can we conclude that there is a larger proportion of Democrats in favor of lowering the standards? Determine the p-value.
Let = <u><em>proportion of Republicans in favor of lowering the standards</em></u>.
= <u><em>proportion of Democrats in favor of lowering the standards</em></u>.
SO, Null Hypothesis, :
{means that there is an equal or larger proportion of Republicans in favor of lowering the standards}
Alternate Hypothesis, :
{means that there is a larger proportion of Democrats in favor of lowering the standards}
The test statistics that would be used here <u>Two-sample z-test for</u> <u>proportions</u>;
T.S. = ~ N(0,1)
where, = sample proportion of Republicans in favor of lowering the standards =
= 0.20
= sample proportion of Democrats in favor of lowering the standards =
= 0.21
= sample of Republicans = 1000
= sample of Democrats = 800
So, <u><em>the test statistics</em></u> =
= -0.52
The value of z test statistics is -0.52.
<u>Now, P-value of the test statistics is given by the following formula; </u>
P-value = P(Z < -0.52) = 1 - P(Z 0.52)
= 1 - 0.6985 = 0.3015
Now, at 0.02 significance level, the z table gives a critical value of -2.054 for left-tailed test.
Since our test statistic is more than the critical value of z as -0.52 > -2.054, so we have insufficient evidence to reject our null hypothesis as it will not fall in the rejection region due to which <em><u>we fail to reject our null hypothesis</u></em>.
Therefore, we conclude that there is an equal or larger proportion of Republicans in favor of lowering the standards.