The slope of a pipe with a 1/4 inch of drop has a run of 1 foot. What is the run of a pipe that has a 3/4 inch drop?

Answer:

a. 10% - 15%

Step-by-step explanation:

The percentage of a job opening, that gets published, is 15% to 20%,  just since just scarcely any occupations can be seen on a paper, commercials, and employment sheets. A large portion of the employment opportunities can be gotten notification from those representatives that worked inside the organization since there is only two job vacancies.

Answer:

the answer is b

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

80 meters (8*10=80)

Answer:

80

Step-by-step explanation:

10 times 8= 80

to find the area is always lenght × height × weight

to find the perimeter is always lenght × lenght × heigth × heigth

example...

a house with the height of 5 and the lenght of 1 .find the perimeter

5+5+1+1= 12

Answer:

1. y + 10 - 3/2y = -y/2 + 10

2. 2r+ 7r-r - 9 = 8r - 9

3.  7 + 4p-5+p+2q = 2 + 5p + 2q

Step-by-step explanation:

basically you can add terms that have the same variable

integers can be added together, Xs can be added, Zs, Ys, As, Bs, Cs, you get the point

1. y + 10 - 3/2y = -y/2 + 10

2. 2r+ 7r-r - 9 = 8r - 9

3.  7 + 4p-5+p+2q = 2 + 5p + 2q (do not add different variables p and q ) together

try 4-6 on your own to get this skill down, if you need help with those just let me know

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

Each rotation is 360° or 2π radians. So, 36.7 rotations is ...

  36.7×360° = 13,212°

or

  36.7×2π = 73.4π radians

Answer:

The answer is B.

Step-by-step explanation:

The example given in the question uses the null hypothesis versus the alternative hypothesis. Null hypothesis is the statement that is tested to be true or not and if it is not true, then the alternative hypothesis is accepted.

In the example, it is stated that the hypothesis test for the null hypothesis failed which means that the statement given on the percentage of students who read the book is false.

Then the option b is going to be interpreted which claims that the null hypothesis is false and there is not enough evidence to say that less than 55% of students read the textbook.

I hope this answer helps.

Final answer:

When a hypothesis test does not reject the null hypothesis with a p-value greater than the alpha level of 0.05, it indicates that there is not sufficient evidence to support the claim being tested, in this case, that less than 55% of students read the textbook.

Explanation:

If a hypothesis test is performed and fails to reject the null hypothesis, the interpretation depends on the results related to the alpha level and the p-value. In this case, where the claim is that less than 55% of students read the textbook and the p-value is greater than the alpha level (0.05 or 5%), the correct interpretation is that there is not sufficient evidence to support the claim that less than 55% of students read the text. This means that the sample data does not provide strong enough evidence to infer that the proportion of students who read the textbook is less than 55% for the entire population of students.

Therefore, the correct answer is:

b. There is not sufficient evidence to support the claim that less than 55% of students read this text.

Answer:

$5,805.92

Step-by-step explanation:

Lets use the compound interest formula provided to solve this:

[tex]A=P(1+\frac{r}{n} )^{nt}[/tex]

P = initial balance

r = interest rate (decimal)

n = number of times compounded annually

t = time

First, change 3% into a decimal:

3% -> [tex]\frac{3}{100}[/tex] -> 0.03

Since the interest is compounded quarterly, we will use 4 for n. Lets plug in the values now:

[tex]A=5,000(1+\frac{0.03}{4})^{4(5)}[/tex]

[tex]A=5,805.92[/tex]

The value of the investment after 5 years will be $5,805.92

Investment value after 5 years, compounded quarterly at 3%, is approximately $5,805.83.

let's calculate step by step.

1. First, let's convert the annual interest rate to decimal form:

 [tex]\[ r = 3\% = \frac{3}{100} = 0.03 \][/tex]

2. Now, let's plug in the given values into the compound interest formula:

[tex]\[ A = P \left(1 + \frac{r}{n}\right)^{nt} \][/tex]

  where:

[tex]- \( P = $5000 \)\\ - \( r = 0.03 \)\\ - \( n = 4 \)\\ - \( t = 5 \)[/tex]

3. Substituting these values into the formula, we get:

[tex]\[ A = 5000 \left(1 + \frac{0.03}{4}\right)^{4 \times 5} \][/tex]

4. Simplifying inside the parentheses:

[tex]\[ A = 5000 \left(1 + 0.0075\right)^{20} \][/tex]

5. Calculating [tex]\( (1 + 0.0075) \):[/tex]

 [tex]\[ 1 + 0.0075 = 1.0075 \][/tex]

6. Now, raise [tex]\( 1.0075 \)[/tex]  to the power of [tex]\( 20 \):[/tex]

[tex]\[ (1.0075)^{20} \][/tex]

  Using a calculator,[tex]\( (1.0075)^{20} \)[/tex] is approximately [tex]\( 1.161166 \).[/tex]

7. Finally, multiply this result by [tex]\( 5000 \):[/tex]

 [tex]\[ A = 5000 \times 1.161166 \]\\ \[ A \approx 5,805.83 \][/tex]

So, the value of the investment in five years, compounded quarterly at a 3% interest rate, would be approximately $5,805.83.

here is complete question:-

"If $5000 is invested at a rate of 3% interest compounded quarterly, what is the value of the investment in five years?"

Answer:

4.49

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

4.49

Step-by-step explanation:

*Imagine it as money, you have $4.25 and you find $0.24

1) 4.25 + 0.24= 4.49

You now have $4.49

Hoped that helped ;)

Answer:

##  Profit/Loss = [tex]14x-400[/tex]

##  29 tickets

Step-by-step explanation:

Profit/Loss is Revenue - Cost

For the fundraisers:

Revenue comes from tickets sold at $14 each

x tickets sold, means the revenue is:

14x

Now, cost is what they are going to give out, that is $400 TV Set, so the cost is:

400

Hence, Profit/Loss would be:

Profit/Loss = [tex]14x-400[/tex]

Raffle sales equaling the cost of prize is basically when we break-even, or when profit/loss is equal to 0. So we solve the equation:

Profit/Loss = 14x - 400

0 = 14x - 400

14x = 400

x = 28.57

We can't sell fractional tickets, so we have to sell 29 tickets in order to break even

Answer:

55

Step-by-step explanation:

Combinations formula is used to make choice of 'R' out of 'N' options =

N(C)R = N ! / [ R ! . (N-R)! ]

Total choices to choose 4 out of 8 friends = 8C4

= 8! / (4! 4!)  

= 70

Choices for calling them 2 together = 2C2 x 6C2

= 1 x [ 6! / (2! 4!)]

= 15

So : Number of choices that the 2 friends are not called together = Total choices - choices they are called together

= 70 - 15 = 55

The answer is c

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

answwr is c and i got it right

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

The minimum score required for a letter of recognition is 631.24.

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 problem, we have that:

[tex]\mu = 493, \sigma = 108[/tex]

What is the minimum score required for a letter of recognition

100 - 10 = 90th percentile, which is the value of X when Z has a pvalue of 0.9. So X when Z = 1.28.

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

[tex]1.28 = \frac{X - 493}{108}[/tex]

[tex]X - 493 = 1.28*108[/tex]

[tex]X = 631.24[/tex]

The minimum score required for a letter of recognition is 631.24.

Answer:

[tex]b=493 +1.28*108=631.24[/tex]

The minimum score required for a letter of recognition would be 631.24

Step-by-step explanation:

Let X the random variable that represent the writing scores of a population, and for this case we know the distribution for X is given by:

[tex]X \sim N(493,108)[/tex]  

Where [tex]\mu=493[/tex] and [tex]\sigma=108[/tex]

On this questio we want to find a value b, such that we satisfy this condition:

[tex]P(X>b)=0.10[/tex]   (a)

[tex]P(X<b)=0.90[/tex]   (b)

Both conditions are equivalent on this case. We can use the z score again in order to find b.

As we can see on the figure attached the z value that satisfy the condition with 0.90 of the area on the left and 0.1 of the area on the right it's z=1.28. On this case P(Z<1.28)=0.9 and P(z>1.28)=0.1

If we use condition (b) from previous we have this:

[tex]P(X<b)=P(\frac{X-\mu}{\sigma}<\frac{b-\mu}{\sigma})=0.90[/tex]  

[tex]P(z<\frac{b-\mu}{\sigma})=0.90[/tex]

[tex]z=1.28<\frac{b-493}{108}[/tex]

And if we solve for a we got

[tex]b=493 +1.28*108=631.24[/tex]

The minimum score required for a letter of recognition would be 631.24

Answer:

2%

Step-by-step explanation:

You do 12÷6×1=2

I used PEMDAS

Final answer:

The probability that Lue will roll a sum of 12 on two rolls of a standard six-sided die is 1/36 or about 2.78%, as only the combination (6,6) results in the sum of 12.

Explanation:

Probability of Rolling a Sum of 12

To calculate the probability that Lue will roll a sum of 12 on two rolls of a six-sided die, we need to consider all the possible combinations that can result in a sum of 12. These combinations are (6,6). Since each die is independent, we calculate the probability for one die and then square it for two dice, because there is only one way to get a six on a die, and there are six faces. Therefore, the probability of rolling a six is:

1/6

To find the probability of rolling two sixes, we multiply the probabilities of each independent event:

(1/6) × (1/6) = 1/36

So, the probability that Lue will roll a sum of 12 in two rolls is 1/36, or approximately 2.78%.

Answer:

Hence the person stop at floor by at least one person will be

E(X)=(summation from K=1 to k)[1-{(k-1)/k}^n]

Step-by-step explanation:

Given:

There are n peoples and k floors in a building.

Selects floor with 1/k probability .

To find :

Elevator stop at each floor by at least one person.

Solution:

Now

let K= number of floor at which at least one person will be stopping.

For getting E(X)

consider a variable Ak =1 if a least one person get of the elevator

and values for k=1,2,3.....k

K=(summation From k=1 to k)Ak

E(K)=((summation From k=1 to k) E[Ak]

=(summation From k=1 to k)[[tex]1-{(k-1/k)^n[/tex]

Hence the person stop at floor by at least one person will be

E(K)=(summation from K=1 to k)[1-{(k-1)/k}^n]

Answer:

-1.39

Step-by-step explanation:

Revenue and cost as a function of units sold are [tex]u(x) = 9x-2x^{2}[/tex]and[tex]c(x)=x^{3}-3x^{2}+4x+1[/tex]  respectively.

we are have to know for which value or input units are these functions at maximum which translates to for how many units is the revenue maximum and for how many same units is our cost minimum.

Answer:0.6 sec

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

0.6 is the answer just took the test

Answer:

[tex]P(X\geq 8)=0.0043\\\\[/tex]

It's more likely that  all of the residents surveyed will have adequate earthquake supplies since it has a probability of 98.02% which is very close to 100%.

Step-by-step explanation:

-This is a binomial probability problem with the function:

[tex]P(X=x)={n\choose x}p^x(1-p)^{n-x}[/tex]

-Given p=0.3, n=11, the is calculated as:

[tex]P(X=x)={n\choose x}p^x(1-p)^{n-x}\\\\P(X\geq 8)=P(X=8)+P(X=9)+P(X=10)+P(X=11)\\\\={11\choose 8}0.3^8(0.7)^3+{11\choose 9}0.3^9(0.7)^2+{11\choose 10}0.3^{10}(0.7)^1+{11\choose 11}0.3^{11}(0.7)^0\\\\=0.0037+0.0005+0.00005+0.000002\\\\=0.0043[/tex]

Hence, the probability that at least 8 have adequate supplies 0.0043

#The probability that non has adequate supplies is calculated as;

[tex]P(X=x)={n\choose x}p^x(1-p)^{n-x}\\\\P(X= 0)={11\choose 0}0.3^{0}(0.7)^{11}\\\\=0.0198[/tex]

#The probability that all have adequate supplies is calculated as:

[tex]P(X=x)={n\choose x}p^x(1-p)^{n-x}\\\\P(X= All)=1-{11\choose 0}0.3^{0}(0.7)^{11}\\\\=1-0.0198\\\\=0.9802[/tex]

Hence, it's more likely that  all of the residents surveyed will have adequate earthquake supplies since [tex]P(All)>P(None)\ \[/tex] and that this probability is 0.9802 or 98.02% a figure close to 1

Final answer:

The probability that at least eight California residents have adequate earthquake supplies when surveying 11 can be calculated with the binomial distribution, summing probabilities for exactly 8, 9, 10, and 11. None having adequate supplies is more likely than all, given the 30% success rate. The average number of surveys before finding a resident without supplies is close to 2, and before finding one with supplies, it is approximately 3.

Explanation:

The probability of at least eight California residents having adequate earthquake supplies when surveying 11 residents can be calculated using the binomial distribution formula. Given that the success probability (having adequate supplies) is 30% (0.3), we can calculate the probability for exactly 8, 9, 10, and 11 residents and sum these probabilities to get the total probability for 'at least 8'.

The random variable X can be defined as the number of successes in n independent Bernoulli trials, with success on each trial having probability p. Here, X represents the number of California residents with adequate earthquake supplies in our sample of 11. The values that X can take on are 0, 1, 2, ..., 11.

To find the probability of none or all residents having adequate supplies, we calculate the probabilities for X = 0 and X = 11. The probability of none (X = 0) would be 0.7¹¹, and the probability of all (X = 11) would be 0.3¹¹. Between these, the probability of none is higher due to the lower success probability.

For the expected number of surveys until finding a resident without adequate supplies, we can use the geometric distribution where the expected value E(X) is 1/p. In this case, p = 0.7 (probability of not having adequate supplies), so E(X) would be approximately 1.43, meaning on average we would have to survey close to one or two residents before finding one without adequate supplies.

Conversely, the expected number of surveys until finding one with adequate supplies would be 1/q, where q = 0.3 (probability of having adequate supplies), giving us an expected value of around 3.33 surveys.

Answer:

C

Step-by-step explanation:

A cube has 6 faces

Each face is a square of area:

5² = 25

Surface area: 6 × 25

= 150 in²

Answer:

150 in^2

Step-by-step explanation:

The surface area of a cube is given by

SA = 6 s^2 where s is the side length

SA = 6 (5)^2

    = 6 * 25

    = 6*25

    = 150 in^2

Answer:

Step-by-step explanation:

He invested $41,000 more than 4 times the amount at 9%.

Total Annual Interest Earned = $35,260

Therefore, Time=1 year

Simple Interest[tex]=\frac{Principal X Rate X Time}{100}[/tex]

Therefore, his total interest

=Interest from Investment 1 + Interest from Investment 2

[tex]35260=\left(\frac{x*5*1}{100} \right)+\left(\frac{4x+41000*9*1}{100} \right)\\35260=0.05x+(0.36x+3690)\\35260-3690=0.05x+0.36x\\31570=0.41x\\\text{Divide both sides by 0.41}\\x=\$77000[/tex]

Therefore:

The amount invested at 5%=$77,000

The amount invested at 9%=$(4*77,000+41000)=$349,000

Answer:

[tex]\Delta A = 5.9\,cm^{2}[/tex]

Step-by-step explanation:

The area of an rectangle is given by the following formula:

[tex]A = w\cdot h[/tex]

Where:

[tex]w[/tex] - Width, in centimeters.

[tex]h[/tex] - Height, in centimeters.

The differential of the expression is derived hereafter:

[tex]\Delta A = \frac{\partial A}{\partial w} \cdot \Delta w + \frac{\partial A}{\partial h}\cdot \Delta h[/tex]

[tex]\Delta A = h \cdot \Delta w + w \cdot \Delta h[/tex]

[tex]\Delta A = (31\,cm)\cdot (0.1\,cm) + (28\,cm)\cdot (0.1\,cm)[/tex]

[tex]\Delta A = 5.9\,cm^{2}[/tex]

Using differentials the maximum error in the calculated area of the rectangle wi’ould be 5.9 cm

The area formular of a rectangle is :

Maximum error can be defined thus :

Δmax = (L × Δe) + (W × Δe)

Δmax = (31 × 0.1) + (28 × 0.1)

Δmax = 3.1 + 2.8

Δmax = 5.9 cm

Hence, the maximum error in the calculated area value is 5.9 cm.

Learn more : https://brainly.com/question/14717218

At a 5 percent significance level and with a p-value of 0.023, we reject the null hypothesis, concluding that more than 20% of cars are speeding.

The question involves determining whether to reject the null hypothesis based on a p-value from a statistical test concerning the true proportion of cars that are speeding on a highway. Since the p-value of 0.023 is less than the alpha level of 0.05, we would reject the null hypothesis (H0: p = 0.20). At the 5 percent significance level, there is sufficient evidence to conclude that more than 20% of cars are speeding on the highway.

Since the p-value is less than the alpha level of 0.05, we reject the null hypothesis. Therefore, the police department should consider installing the speed sensor and traffic camera.

To determine if the police department should install a speed sensor and traffic camera based on a significance test, we need to examine the hypotheses:

H0: p = 0.20 (the true proportion of cars speeding is 20%)

H1: p > 0.20 (the true proportion of cars speeding is greater than 20%)

Given that in a random sample of 100 cars, 28 were speeding, the test resulted in a p-value of 0.023. At the alpha level of 0.05, since the p-value (0.023) is less than alpha (0.05), we reject the null hypothesis.

In conclusion, at the 5 percent significance level, there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the true proportion of cars speeding is greater than 20%, justifying the installation of the speed sensor and traffic camera.

Answer:

$7.92

Step-by-step explanation:

110 - ((32 x 2.40) + (32 x 0.79)) = $7.92

Answer:

$7.92 dollars left over

Step-by-step explanation:

32* 2.40= 76.8

32*0.79= 25.28

25.28+ 76.8= 102.08

110-102.08

===========7.92

Answer:

H0 : mu1 = mu2

Ha : mu1 ≠ mu2

Which means

Null hypothesis H0; the true mean price when buying from a friend mu1 and the true mean price when buying from a stranger mu2 is the same/equal

Alternative hypothesis Ha; the true mean price when buying from a friend mu1 and the true mean price when buying from a stranger mu2 is different (not equal)

Step-by-step explanation:

The null hypothesis (H0) tries to show that no significant variation exists between variables or that a single variable is no different than its mean(i.e it tries to prove that the old theory is true). While an alternative Hypothesis (Ha) attempt to prove that a new theory is true rather than the old one. That a variable is significantly different from the mean.

Therefore, for the case above;

H0 : mu1 = mu2

Ha : mu1 ≠ mu2

Which means

Null hypothesis H0; the true mean price when buying from a friend mu1 and the true mean price when buying from a stranger mu2 is the same/equal

Alternative hypothesis Ha; the true mean price when buying from a friend mu1 and the true mean price when buying from a stranger mu2 is different (not equal)

To find the annual interest rate of Nadia’s account, we use the simple interest formula I = PRT. By rearranging the formula and plugging in the known values, we determine that the interest rate is 5.5%.

To determine the interest rate of Nadia’s account, we can use the formula for simple interest I = PRT, where I is the interest earned, P is the principal amount deposited, R is the annual interest rate in decimal, and T is the time in years. In Nadia's case, we know that she earned $990 in interest (I), deposited $3000 (P), over 6 years (T).

We need to solve for R.

The formula thus becomes: $990 = $3000 × R × 6

To find R, we divide both sides of the equation by $3000 × 6:

R = $990 / ($3000 × 6)

R = $990 / $18000

R = 0.055 or 5.5%

Therefore, the annual interest rate Nadia received on her account was 5.5%.

Answer:

 We are 98% confident interval for the mean caffeine content for cups dispensed by the machine between 107.66 and 112.34 mg .

Step-by-step explanation:

Given -

The sample size is large then we can use central limit theorem

n = 50 ,  

Standard deviation[tex](\sigma)[/tex] = 7.1

Mean [tex]\overline{(y)}[/tex] = 110

[tex]\alpha =[/tex] 1 - confidence interval = 1 - .98 = .02

[tex]z_{\frac{\alpha}{2}}[/tex] = 2.33

98% confidence interval for the mean caffeine content for cups dispensed by the machine = [tex]\overline{(y)}\pm z_{\frac{\alpha}{2}}\frac{\sigma}\sqrt{n}[/tex]

                     = [tex]110\pm z_{.01}\frac{7.1}\sqrt{50}[/tex]

                      = [tex]110\pm 2.33\frac{7.1}\sqrt{50}[/tex]

       First we take  + sign

   [tex]110 + 2.33\frac{7.1}\sqrt{50}[/tex] = 112.34

now  we take  - sign

[tex]110 - 2.33\frac{7.1}\sqrt{50}[/tex] = 107.66

 We are 98% confident interval for the mean caffeine content for cups dispensed by the machine between 107.66 and 112.34 .

Final answer:

A 98% confidence interval for the mean caffeine content of cups dispensed by the machine is calculated using the sample mean, the standard deviation, and the Z-score for a 98% confidence level, leading to an interval of (107.72 mg, 112.28 mg). We can be 98% confident that the true mean caffeine content lies within this range.

Explanation:

To construct a 98% confidence interval for the mean caffeine content of cups dispensed by the machine, we use the provided sample mean (μ), which is 110 mg, and the standard deviation (s), which is 7.1 mg, of the 50 cups sampled. Since the sample size is 50, which is more than 30, we can use the Z-distribution as an approximation of the T-distribution for this confidence interval as the Central Limit Theorem suggests that the distribution of sample means will be normally distributed if the sample size is large enough. Using a Z-score for 98% confidence, which typically is approximately 2.33 (you would obtain the exact value from a Z-table), the margin of error (E) can be calculated using the formula E = Z * (s/√n), where n is the sample size (50 in this case).

The margin of error is then 2.33 * (7.1/√50), which equals approximately 2.28 mg. The 98% confidence interval is therefore the sample mean plus or minus the margin of error, which is 110 mg ± 2.28 mg or (107.72 mg, 112.28 mg).

The interpretation of this confidence interval is that we can be 98% confident that the true mean caffeine content of all cups of coffee dispensed by the machine falls between 107.72 mg and 112.28 mg.

Step-by-step explanation:

Check the attached file for solution and

simulation screen shot

R-Code:

Sample mean

sd = 60 Population Standard deviation

n = 10 Sample size

conf.level = 0.99 Confidence level

[tex]\alpha = 1-conf.level[/tex]

[tex]z\star = \round(\qnorm(1-\alpha/2),2); z.\star[/tex]

[tex]E = \round(z* \times \sigma/\sqrt(n),2); E[/tex]

[tex]x= c(E,-E)[/tex]

Answer:

[tex]t=\frac{12.2-11.5}{\frac{1.6}{\sqrt{34}}}=2.551[/tex]    

[tex] df = n-1=34-1=33[/tex]

[tex]p_v =P(t_{(33)}>2.551)=0.008[/tex]  

Since the p value is less than the significance level of 0.05 we have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis in favor of the claim

And the best conclusion for this case would be:

b)The p-value is 0.008, indicating sufficient evidence for his claim.

Step-by-step explanation:

Information provided

[tex]\bar X=12.2[/tex] represent the sample mean fould against

[tex]s=1.6[/tex] represent the sample standard deviation

[tex]n=34[/tex] sample size  

represent the value that we want to test

[tex]\alpha=0.05[/tex] represent the significance level for the hypothesis test.  

t would represent the statistic (variable of interest)  

[tex]p_v[/tex] represent the p value for the test (variable of interest)  

System of hypothesis

We need to conduct a hypothesis in order to check if the true mean is higher than 11.5 fouls per game:  

Null hypothesis:[tex]\mu \leq 11.5[/tex]  

Alternative hypothesis:[tex]\mu > 11.5[/tex]  

The statistic is given by:

[tex]t=\frac{\bar X-\mu_o}{\frac{s}{\sqrt{n}}}[/tex]  (1)  

The statistic is given by:

[tex]t=\frac{12.2-11.5}{\frac{1.6}{\sqrt{34}}}=2.551[/tex]    

P value

The degreed of freedom are given by:

[tex] df = n-1=34-1=33[/tex]

Since is a one side test the p value would be:  

[tex]p_v =P(t_{(33)}>2.551)=0.008[/tex]  

Since the p value is less than the significance level of 0.05 we have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis in favor of the claim

And the best conclusion for this case would be:

b)The p-value is 0.008, indicating sufficient evidence for his claim.