can anybody help me with this im kinda stumped

Julie hourly rate of pay from the given different rates of the day with total earning of $612 is equal to $12per hour.

Total number of hours Julie works in a week is equal to,

On Sunday = 10 hours

On Monday = 10 hours

On Tuesday = 7 hours

On Wednesday = 10 hours

On Thursday = 7 hours

On Friday = 7 hours

On Saturday = 0 hours

Total hours worked in whole week is

= 10 + 10 + 7 + 10 + 7 + 7 + 0

= 51 hours

Total money earned by Julie in whole week = $612

Hourly rate of pay = Weekly earnings / Total hours worked

Substitute the value we have,

⇒ Hourly rate of pay = $612 / 51 hours

⇒ Hourly rate of pay = $12 per hour

Therefore, Julie's hourly rate of pay is $12 per hour.

Learn more about rate of pay here

brainly.com/question/14458921

#SPJ4

The above question is incomplete , the complete question is:

Julie works Sunday, Monday, and Wednesday for 10 hours each day. On Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday, she works 7 hours each day. She does not work on Saturday. Her weekly total earnings are $612. What is Julie's hourly rate of pay, in dollars?

The test static for sample of 50 men, 44 said that they had less leisure time today than they had 10 years ago is 0.2377.

A number derived from a statistical test of a hypothesis is the test statistic. It displays how closely your actual data fit the distribution predicted by the statistical test's null hypothesis.

In order to determine whether to accept or reject your null hypothesis, the test statistic is utilised to calculate the p value of your findings.

In a sample of 50 men, 44 said that they had less leisure time today than they had 10 years ago.

In a sample of 50 women, 48 women said that they had less leisure time than they

had 10 years ago.

p-hat men:: 44/50 = 0.22

p-hat women:: 48/50 = 0.24

Test Stat:

z(0.24-0.22) =[tex]\frac{0.02}{\sqrt{[(0.22*0.78/50)+(0.24*0.76/50)]} }[/tex] = 0.2377

At [tex]\alpha[/tex] = .05, is there a difference in the proportions between the men and women

[tex]p-value = 2*P(z > 0.2377) = 0.8121[/tex]

Since the p-value is greater than 5%, fail to reject H.

H: p(men)-p(women) = 0

Ha: p(men)-p(women) # 0 = .05, is there a difference in the proportions between the men and women

p-value = 2*P(z > 0.2377) = 0.8121

Since the p-value is greater than 5%, fail to reject H.

H: p(men)-p(women) = 0

Ha: p(men)-p(women) # 0

Learn more about Test statistic:

https://brainly.com/question/15110538

#SPJ4

Complete question:

In a sample of 50 men, 44 said that they had less leisure time today than they had 10 years ago. In a sample of 50 women, 48 women said that they had less leisure time than they had 10 years ago. What is the test statistic? At  [tex]\alpha[/tex] = .05, is there a difference in the proportions between the men and women?

Thus, Camilla's onion weighs about 28 grammes per ounce in terms of grammes to ounces.

Weight is the force of gravity that pulls objects towards the centre of the Earth. The resulting force that pulls a substance towards Earth is known as gravity. In contrast to gravity force, which occurs among any two masses, this only occurs between Planet and a mass.

To convert from grams to ounces, we can use the conversion factor of 1 ounce = 28.35 grams. Therefore:

1 gram = 1/28.35 ounces

To find the ratio of grams to ounces for Camilla's onion, we can divide the weight in grams by the weight in ounces:

112 grams ÷ 4 ounces ≈ 28 grams per ounce

So the ratio of grams to ounces for Camilla's onion is approximately 28 grams per ounce.

To know more about Weight visit:

https://brainly.com/question/25973294

#SPJ1

The conditional probability that Eric is a high-risk driver, given that he has had no traffic accidents in the past three years, is very low. Generally, insurance companies use the number of traffic violations and/or the number of claims a driver has had within a certain time period as indicators of their riskiness.

As Eric has had no accidents or traffic violations, the probability that he is a high-risk driver is very low. However, this does not mean that the probability is zero. There are many other factors which can contribute to a driver's risk, such as age, gender, experience, and location.

If Eric is an experienced driver, who has been driving for many years with no traffic accidents, then the probability of him being a high-risk driver will be lower than the average driver. On the other hand, if Eric is a new driver, or is located in an area with a high rate of traffic accidents, then the probability of him being a high-risk driver may be higher than the average driver.

Overall, the conditional probability that Eric is a high-risk driver, given that he has had no traffic accidents in the past three years, is very low. However, this probability can change depending on other factors, such as his age, experience, and location.

See more about conditional probability at: https://brainly.com/question/23382435

#SPJ11

The write-off of the receivable from Madonna Inc. is a necessary adjustment to ensure the accuracy of Marin Co.'s financial statements. Without it, the company's accounts receivable would be overstated and their financial statements would not provide an accurate portrayal of the company's financial position.

At the end of 2024, Marin Co. had accounts receivable of $673,200 and an allowance for doubtful accounts of $24,010. On January 24th, 2025, it was determined that the company's receivable from Madonna Inc. was not collectible and management authorized a write-off of $4,147. This action reduces the accounts receivable balance by $4,147, and reduces the allowance for doubtful accounts by the same amount. The net effect on the balance sheet is a reduction of $4,147 in both accounts receivable and allowance for doubtful accounts.

The impact of the write-off on the company's financial statements is a decrease in net income for the period. This is because a write-off is recognized as an expense, which reduces the amount of net income reported in the period. The amount of the write-off is recorded as an expense on the income statement. In this case, the amount of the write-off is $4,147.

The journal entry to record the write-off would be: Accounts Receivable 4,147; Allowance for Doubtful Accounts 4,147. This entry reduces the accounts receivable and allowance for doubtful accounts by $4,147. The write-off of $4,147 is recorded as an expense on the income statement, and this reduces the net income reported for the period.

for such more questions on financial statements

https://brainly.com/question/26240841

#SPJ11

If the population growth rate is 3.5 percent every year then the population of the town after 7 years would be 14940.

Given that population grows 3.5 percent every year.

So, the increase in population after one year

= 3.5% of 12000

= (3.5/100) × 12000

= 420

Thus the increase in population after 7 year would be,

= population increase in one year × 7

= 420×7 = 2940

Hence population of the town after 7 years = (present population + increase in population)

= 12000 + 2940

= 14940

So the population of the town after 7 years with 3.5 % growth every year would be 14490.

Visit here to learn more about the percent: https://brainly.com/question/28670903

#SPJ4

The answer to subtracting the two polynomials is 2x2 - 10x - 7.  The process of subtracting polynomials is like that of subtracting any other type of numerical expression.

Polynomials are mathematical expressions consisting of variables, coefficients, and exponents. They are used to represent a variety of functions, such as polynomial equations, rational equations, and trigonometric functions.

In this case, our like terms are 2x2 and 4x2, and -6x and -4x, and -4 and +3. We begin by subtracting the coefficients of the like terms. We subtract the coefficient of the term with the highest power first. In this case, that is 2x2 and 4x2, we subtract 2 from 4 to get 2. Next, we subtract the coefficients of the terms with the second highest power. This is -6x and -4x, so we subtract -6 from -4 to get -2. Thus, our answer now reads 2x2 -2x.

Finally, we subtract the coefficients of the terms with the lowest power. This is -4 and +3, so we subtract -4 from 3 to get -7. Thus, our answer now reads 2x2 -2x -7.

This answer can then be placed in the proper position on the grid.

For more questions related to coefficients

https://brainly.com/question/28872453

#SPJ1

Answer: Inequality 1

Step-by-step explanation: Let's solve each inequality first.

4(2.8z+175 )>-26.6

let's distribute the 4.

4(2.8z)+4(175)

11.2z+700>-26.6

Now let's isolate the variable by subtracting 700 on each side.

11.2z>-726.6

Now let's divide both sides by 11.2

z>-64.875

Oh? This one already has 5 as a solution as 5 is more than -64.875!

Answer:

diameter = 34 radius = 17

Step-by-step explanation:

Look at the line in the middle of the circle that is the diameter, diameter is a straight line passing from side to side through the center of a circle.

radius is the distance from the center of the circle to any point on its circumference.

The sector area of a circle is quadrupled when the radius is doubled. When the radius is doubled, the arc length of a circle is also doubled. This happens because the sector area and arc length are both dependent on the radius of a circle. Therefore, any change in the radius of a circle affects both its sector area and arc length.

Let us understand both these concepts in detail:

Sector area of a circle: A sector is a region of a circle, and the area enclosed by two radii and an arc is known as a sector area. The formula for the sector area of a circle is given by:

Sector Area = (θ/360)πr²

where θ is the central angle in degrees,

r is the radius of the circle,

and is a constant value.

If we double the radius of a circle, the sector area increases by a factor of 4. This is because the sector area is directly proportional to the square of the radius.

Hence, doubling the radius of a circle results in an increase in the sector area by a factor of 22 (four).

Arc length of a circle: The length of an arc is the distance between two points on a circle. The formula for the arc length of a circle is given:

Arc Length = (θ/360)2πr

where θ is the central angle in degrees,

r is the radius of the circle,

and 2pie is a constant value.

If we double the radius of a circle, the arc length also doubles.

This is because the arc length is directly proportional to the radius.

Hence, doubling the radius of a circle results in an increase in the arc length by a factor of 2.

To learn more about “Sector Area” refer to the https://brainly.com/question/22972014

#SPJ11

Answer:

No, q=15 is not a solution to the inequality.

Step-by-step explanation:

As given, q=15. So, substituting is the best way to solve this problem.

Step 1: Substitute

[tex]\frac{15}{5}=3[/tex]

[tex]15-20=-5[/tex]

Step 2: Substitute values into inequality

[tex]3 < -5[/tex]

Equation is false since 3 is a bigger value than -5.

Hope this helps ya!

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

Let's use algebra to solve this problem.

Let's start by assigning variables to the unknown quantities. Let G be the initial number of green beads and Y be the initial number of yellow beads.

We know that the number of green beads is 1/3 the number of yellow beads:

G = (1/3)Y

After giving away some beads, he had 42 green beads and 270 yellow beads left. So we can set up two equations using this information:

G - 2f = 42

Y - 3f = 270

where f is the number of friends he gave the beads to.

Now we can substitute G = (1/3)Y into the first equation:

(1/3)Y - 2f = 42

Multiplying both sides by 3, we get:

Y - 6f = 126

Now we have two equations that we can solve simultaneously:

Y - 3f = 270

Y - 6f = 126

Subtracting the first equation from the second, we get:

3f = 144

So f = 48. He gave the beads to 48 friends.

To find the total number of beads he had at first, we can use the equation G = (1/3)Y:

G + Y = (4/3)Y = (4/3)(270) = 360

So he had a total of 360 beads at first.

Therefore, the formula for T1 is T1(x1,x2) =[tex](24x1/5 - 18x2/5, -36x1/5 + 6x2/5).[/tex]

Given T is a linear transformation from R2 into R2, we need to show that T is invertible and find a formula for T1.T(x1,x2) = (3x1-9x2, -3x1+5x2)Let A be the standard matrix for T, then we have to find the determinant of A as it will help us determine whether T is invertible or not.The standard matrix for T is given as :A = [3 -9-3 5]Now, to calculate the determinant of A, we have to use the formula as:det(A) = ad - bcwhere a = 3, b = -9, c = -3, d = 5Now, substituting the values of a, b, c, d, we get,det(A) = (3 × 5) - (-9 × -3) = 15 - 27= -12Since the determinant of A is not equal to zero, therefore, T is invertible.

For finding the formula for T1, we need to calculate the inverse of T. We can find the inverse of T as:[tex][A|I] → [I|A-1][/tex]Now, appending the identity matrix to A, we get the following matrix.[A|I] = [tex][3 -9|1 0-3 5|0 1]→ [I|A-1] = [1 3/5|-9/5-3/5][/tex]

Therefore, the inverse of T is T-1(x1,x2) = (3x1/5 + 9x2/5, -9x1/5 - 3x2/5)Now, we can find T1 by substituting T-1 in T, we get,T1(x1,x2) = T(T-1(x1,x2)) =[tex]T(3x1/5 + 9x2/5, -9x1/5 - 3x2/5) = (3((3x1/5 + 9x2/5)) - 9(-9x1/5 - 3x2/5), -3((3x1/5 + 9x2/5)) + 5(-9x1/5 - 3x2/5)) = (24x1/5 - 18x2/5, -36x1/5 + 6x2/5)[/tex]

for such more questions on  linear transformation

https://brainly.com/question/29642164

#SPJ11

Answer:

16x + 3

Step-by-step explanation:

Simplify by combining like terms.  Add the terms with x, then add the integers.

8x + 8x + 4 - 1 = 16x + 3

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

If we repeated a hypothesis test 1000 times, the number of times we would expect to commit a Type I error, assuming the null hypothesis were true, would depend on the significance level (α) of the test.

A Type I error occurs when we reject the null hypothesis when it is actually true. The significance level of a test (α) is the probability of making a Type I error when the null hypothesis is true. In other words, if we set a significance level of α = 0.05, we are saying that we are willing to tolerate a 5% chance of making a Type I error.

Assuming a significance level of α = 0.05, if we repeated the test 1000 times, we would expect to make a Type I error in approximately 50 tests (0.05 x 1000 = 50). This means that in 50 out of the 1000 tests, we would reject the null hypothesis even though it is actually true.

However, it is important to note that the actual number of Type I errors we make in practice may differ from our expectation, as it depends on the specific characteristics of the population being tested and the sample sizes used in each test.

For more details about hypothesis click here:

https://brainly.com/question/29519577#

#SPJ11

Looks like your question already has an answer! https://brainly.com/question/22200751

Serena's overall grade in the course is 75.5%. It's important to note that in a weighted grading system like this, the final exam is often a major determinant of the final grade.

To calculate Serena's overall grade, we need to first determine the weight of the final exam. We know that the assignments are worth 45% and the quizzes are worth 40%, which leaves 100% - 45% - 40% = 15% for the final exam.

Next, we can calculate Serena's grade for each component of the course. Her grade for assignments is 78% and her grade for quizzes is 65%. We can calculate her grade for the final exam by multiplying her score of 96% by the weight of the final, which is 15%:

Final grade = (0.45 * 78%) + (0.4 * 65%) + (0.15 * 96%)

Final grade = 35.1% + 26% + 14.4%

Final grade = 75.5%

Therefore, Serena's overall grade in the course is 75.5%. It's important to note that in a weighted grading system like this, the final exam is often a major determinant of the final grade. In this case, Serena's strong performance on the final exam helped to boost her overall grade, even though her scores on the assignments and quizzes were not as high. It's also worth noting that this calculation assumes that all assignments, quizzes, and the final exam were weighted equally within their respective categories (i.e., each assignment was worth the same percentage of the assignment grade).

To know more about determinant click here:

brainly.com/question/15362698

#SPJ4

The composite function (f + g)(3) when evaluated from f(x) = −3x² + 3x and g(x) = 2x+5 is -7

Given that

f(x) = −3x² + 3x and

g(x) = 2x+5

To perform the operation (ƒ + g)(3), we need to add the functions ƒ(x) and g(x) first, and then evaluate the sum at x = 3.

ƒ(x) = −3x² + 3x

g(x) = 2x + 5

To add the functions, we simply add their corresponding terms:

(ƒ + g)(x) = ƒ(x) + g(x) = (−3x² + 3x) + (2x + 5)

When the like terms are evaluated, we have

(ƒ + g)(3) = −3x² + 5x + 5

Now, we can evaluate the sum at x = 3:

(ƒ + g)(3) = −3(3)² + 5(3) + 5

So, we have

(ƒ + g)(3) = −27 + 15 + 5

Lastly, we have

(ƒ + g)(3) = -7

Therefore, (ƒ + g)(3) = -7.

Read more about composite function at

https://brainly.com/question/10687170

#SPJ1

Therefore, the best measure of center for this data is the median, and its value is 3.

The median is a measure of central tendency that represents the middle value of a set of data when it is arranged in order from lowest to highest (or highest to lowest). It is the value that divides the data set into two equal halves, with half of the values above and half below the median.

Here,

The median is the best measure of center for this data because it is skewed and not symmetrical. The value of the median can be found by ordering the data from smallest to largest: 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 10. The median is the middle value, which is 3.

To know more about median,

https://brainly.com/question/29156884

#SPJ1

Percents of student failed in the test is 15.87%

Final grades are distributed normally.

Assuming mean, which is = 70

Provided that the standard deviation is 10,

Standard score or z-score refers to the normal random variable in a standard normal distribution. The following equation can convert each normal random variable X into a z score:

z=(X−μ)/σ

If X is a normal random variable, represents its mean, and represents its standard deviation.

For X=60 Z=(60−70)/10=−1

P(X<60)=P(Z<−1) \s =0.1587

Hence, 15.87% of pupils failed the test.

By dividing the sum of the given numbers by the entire number of numbers, the mean—the average of the given numbers—is determined.

Mean is equal to (Sum of All Observations/Total Observations).

To know more about standard deviation, click the below link

https://brainly.com/question/2043700

#SPJ4

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

Let's start by using algebra to solve the problem.

Let x be the number of games that Mark started with.

Mark sold half of his games to his brother, so he sold x/2 games. This means he had x - x/2 = x/2 games after selling half to his brother.

He then bought 16 more games, so he had x/2 + 16 games.

Finally, we're told he now has 36 games, so we can set up the equation:

x/2 + 16 = 36

Simplifying the equation, we get:

x/2 = 20

Multiplying both sides by 2, we get:

x = 40

Therefore, Mark started with 40 games.

Answer:

Mark had 40 games to start with.

Step-by-step explanation:

You know this because you can take away the 16 games he bought, which leaves him with half of what he started with which is 20. And if 20 is half of his games you can double it to give you his starting number of games.

:)

Larger sample sizes typically result in more precise population mean estimates with lower sampling variability. Thus, when calculating population metrics like the mean, it is frequently preferable to utilize larger sample numbers.

The variability of the sampling distribution of the mean reduces with an increase in the number of observation units. The central limit theorem refers to this.

According to the central limit theorem, the sampling distribution of the mean gets more normal as the sample size grows, and its standard deviation (i.e., the standard error of the mean) drops. Particularly, the square root of the sample size has an inverse relationship with the standard error of the mean.

Learn more about mean here

https://brainly.com/question/15323584

#SPJ4

Answer:

Let's call the length of the hypotenuse SD as x.

Since the altitude from T to SD divides SD into two parts, let the length of the shorter part be y. Then the length of the longer part is x-y.

Using similar triangles, we have:

TU/TS = ST/TD

Substituting the values we have:

TU/(3√5) = √5/UD

TU = (3/5)UD

Using the Pythagorean theorem in triangle TUS, we have:

TU² + (3√5)² = TS²

(3/5 UD)² + 45 = ST²

9/25 UD² + 45 = ST²

Using the Pythagorean theorem in triangle TUD, we have:

TU² + UD² = TD²

(3/5 UD)² + UD² = x²

9/25 UD² + UD² = x²

34/25 UD² = x²

UD² = (25/34)x²

Substituting the value of UD² in the equation ST² = 9/25 UD² + 45, we get:

ST² = 9/25 (25/34)x² + 45

ST² = 45/34 x² + 45

Since y = x-y-1, we have y = (x-1)/2.

Using the Pythagorean theorem in triangle TUD, we have:

(1/4) (x-1)² + UD² = x²

(1/4) (x² - 2x + 1) + (25/34)x² = x²

(1/4)(x²) + (25/34)x² - (1/2)x + (1/4) = 0

(59/68)x² - (1/2)x + (1/4) = 0

Using the quadratic formula, we get:

x = [1/2 ± √(1/4 - 4(59/68)(1/4))]/(2(59/68))

x = [1/2 ± (3√34)/17]/(59/34)

x = 17/59 ± 6√34/59

Since x is the hypotenuse SD, we have:

UD² = (25/34) x²

UD² = (25/34) [(17/59 ± 6√34/59)²]

UD² = 136/59 ± 204√34/295

Therefore, the exact lengths of the two parts of the hypotenuse are:

SD = x = 17/59 ± 6√34/59

SU = x-y = (x-1)/2 = 8/59 ± 3√34/59

UD = y = (x-1)/2 = 8/59 ± 3√34/59

TU = (3/5) UD = (3/5) [8/59 ± 3√34/59] = 24/295 ± 9√34/295

ST² = 45/34 x² + 45 = 45/34 [(17/59 ± 6√34/59)²] + 45

ST = √[45/34 [(17/59 ± 6√34/59)²] + 45]

The weight range within which the middle 95% of all miniature Tootsie Rolls will fall is approximately between 3.04 grams and 3.56 grams.

Since the weight of miniature Tootsie Rolls is normally distributed with a mean of 3.30 grams and a standard deviation of 0.13 grams, we can use the standard normal distribution to find the weight range within which the middle 95% of all miniature Tootsie Rolls will fall.

We need to find the z-scores that correspond to the middle 95% of the normal distribution. The area between the two z-scores will be 0.95. Using a standard normal distribution table or calculator, we can find that the z-scores that correspond to the middle 95% of the distribution are -1.96 and 1.96.

We can use the formula z = (x - μ) / σ to find the corresponding weight values for these z-scores. Substituting -1.96 for z and solving for x, we get:

-1.96 = (x - 3.30) / 0.13

x = 3.04

Similarly, substituting 1.96 for z and solving for x, we get:

1.96 = (x - 3.30) / 0.13

x = 3.56

Therefore, the weight range within which the middle 95% of all miniature Tootsie Rolls will fall is approximately between 3.04 grams and 3.56 grams.

To know more about standard normal distribution table refer here:

https://brainly.com/question/30404390#

#SPJ11

The answer based on debt to assets ratio for east and west company are,

East company debt to assets ratio is equal to 0.44.

West company debt to assets ratio is equal to 0.28.

After comparing both the company debt to assets ratio East company is at higher level of financial risk.

Assets = Liabilities + Equity

For East company,

206,000 =  91,000 + 115,000

Assets = 206,000

liabilities = 91,000

Equity = 115,000

For West company,

603,000 =  169,000 + 434,000

Assets = 603,000

liabilities = 169,000

Equity = 434,000

Debt-to-assets ratio = Total liabilities divided by the total assets.

Debt-to-assets ratio for East

= 91,000 / 206,000

= 0.44

Debt-to-assets ratio for West

= 169,000 / 603,000

= 0.28

Comparing the two ratios,

0.44 > 0.28

This implies,

Company East has a higher debt-to-assets ratio is greater than the compared to Company West.

This represents that Company East has a higher level of financial risk.

As larger proportion of their assets are financed through debt.

This shows it is difficult to repay if the company experiences financial difficulties.

Company West has a lower level of financial risk as smaller proportion of their assets are financed through debt.

Therefore, the answer of the following questions are,

Debt to asset ratio of east company = 0.44

Debt to asset ratio of west company = 0.28

Company east has a higher financial risk level .

learn more about debt to asset ratio here

https://brainly.com/question/18648883

#SPJ4

Answer:

x

=

−

y

2

+

10

Step-by-step explanation:

The correlation coefficient between heights from the ground of two people on the opposite ends of a seesaw would depend on the weight of the people and their distance apart.

When the seesaw is in equilibrium, the height of the people will be related inversely proportional to their weight. If the weight of one person increases, the height of the other person would decrease and vice versa.

The correlation coefficient will be negative and can range from -1 to 0, with -1 being the highest correlation. The closer the correlation coefficient is to -1, the more closely related the heights of the two people will be. The correlation coefficient will be zero when the people are not in equilibrium.

This is because the height of the people is not related in any way when the seesaw is not in equilibrium. Therefore, the correlation coefficient between heights from the ground of two people on the opposite ends of a seesaw is negative and ranges from -1 to 0.

Know more about correlation here

https://brainly.com/question/27226153#

#SPJ11

The three interior angles of a triangle measure z degrees , (x+5)degrees , and (x+25) degrees. So, the measure of one of the three angles is x+5.

The sum of the interior angles of a triangle is always 180 degrees.

Therefore, we can write an equation using the given angle measures:

z + (x+5) + (x+25) = 180

Simplifying the equation, we get:

2x + 30 + z = 180

Subtracting 30 and z from both sides, we get:

2x = 150 - z

Dividing both sides by 2, we get:

x = (150 - z) / 2 - 5

So the measure of one of the three angles is x+5, which is:

x + 5 = [(150 - z) / 2 - 5] + 5

x + 5 = (150 - z) / 2

x + 5 = 75 - z/2

Therefore, one of the angles measures (x+5) degrees.

Learn more about triangle here https://brainly.com/question/2773823

#SPJ4