It is known that driving can be difficult in regions where winter conditions involve snow-covered roads. for cars equipped with all-season tires traveling at 90 kilometers per hour, the mean stopping time in fresh snow is known to be 215 meters, with a standard deviation of σ = 2.5 meters. it is often advocated that automobiles in such areas should be equipped with special tires to compensate for such conditions, especially with respect to stopping distance. a manufacturer of tires made for driving in fresh snow claims that vehicles equipped with their tires have a decreased stopping distance. a study was done using a random sample of nine snow tires from the manufacturer on a snow-covered test track. the tests resulted in a mean stopping distance of = 212.9 meters. what are the appropriate null and alternative hypotheses to test the manufacturer's claim?

The null and alternative hypothesis for this test are

Step-by-step explanation:

If we perform a hypothesis test, we can reject or not reject the null hypothesis.

To conclude that the tires have a decreased stopping distance (μ<215), we should state the null hypothesis and then go on with the analysis to reject it (or not).

If the null hypothesis is rejected, the claim of the manufacturer is rigth.

The alternative hypothesis would be , that would turn rigth if the null hypothesis is rejected.

1. 2

2. 11

3. 5

4. 6

5. 7

6. 5

7. -1

8. 1

step-by-step explanation:

22, 28, 34, 40, 46

b)   f(n) = 6n + 16

n = what is the number of the row ( 22 would be row 1) so if we replaced n with 1, we would get 22

c)   the 14th row will have 100 seats

(1)   (2)   (3)   (4)   (5)   (6)   (7)   (8)   (9)   (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

22 | 28 | 34 | 40 | 46 | 52 | 58 | 64 | 70 | 76 | 82 | 88 | 94 | 100