A bicycle safely organization claims that fatal bicycle accidents are uniformly distributed over Thursday, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. The table below shows on which days 400 randomly selected fatal bicycle accidents occurred. At \alpha α= 0.01, can you reject the claim that the distribution is uniform?
-step the level of significance
-calculate the test statistic
-determine the d. f. and the critical value
-what is the rejection region?
-make your decision
-state your conclusion

b) 1/3 * 1/5

step-by-step explanation:

each smallest part is 1/15 since the written one is 1/5 and it's divided by 3 equal parts. (1/5 )/3 = 1/15 = 1/3 * 1/5

fjfjfhdhdhdhjjdjdjdjdjjd thats the answers

step-by-step explanation:

the car was traveling 40 mph before it started skidding. ( 2 points ) 17. was the driver were her brakes working at 75% efficiency or better? ( 2 points ) yes 29.

step-by-step explanation:

i think it's eleven too, don't woosh me here, but according to the "experts" it's 2.

the proof starts from the peano postulates, which define the natural

numbers n. n is the smallest set satisfying these postulates:

  p1.   1 is in n.

  p2.   if x is in n, then its "successor" x' is in n.

  p3.   there is no x such that x' = 1.

  p4.   if x isn't 1, then there is a y in n such that y' = x.

  p5.   if s is a subset of n, 1 is in s, and the implication

      (x in s => x' in s) holds, then s = n.

then you have to define addition recursively:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 1, then define a + b = a'

      (using p1 and p2). if b isn't 1, then let c' = b, with c in n

      (using p4), and define a + b = (a + c)'.

then you have to define 2:

  def:   2 = 1'

2 is in n by p1, p2, and the definition of 2.

theorem:   1 + 1 = 2

proof: use the first part of the definition of + with a = b = 1.

      then 1 + 1 = 1' = 2   q.e.d.

note: there is an alternate formulation of the peano postulates which

replaces 1 with 0 in p1, p3, p4, and p5. then you have to change the

definition of addition to this:

  def: let a and b be in n. if b = 0, then define a + b = a.

      if b isn't 0, then let c' = b, with c in n, and define

      a + b = (a + c)'.

you also have to define 1 = 0', and 2 = 1'. then the proof of the

theorem above is a little different:

proof: use the second part of the definition of + first:

      1 + 1 = (1 + 0)'

      now use the first part of the definition of + on the sum in

      parentheses:   1 + 1 = (1)' = 1' = 2   q.e.d.