The following data show the retail price for 12 randomly selected laptop computers along with their corresponding processor speeds in gigahertz. computers speed price1 2.0 $ 1008.502 1.6 461.003 1.6 532.004 1.8 971.005 2.0 1068.506 1.2 506.007 2.0 1098.508 1.6 693.509 2.0 1057.0010 1.6 1001.0011 1.0 468.5012 1.4 435.50a. develop a linear equation that can be used to describe how the price depends on the processor speed. (negative value should be indicated by a minus sign. round your answers to the nearest whole number.)price=+ speedb. based on your regression equation, is there one machine that seems particularly over- or underpriced? a. yes, the second laptop is underpriced. b.yes, the fourth laptop is overpriced. c.no, there is no laptop which is over- or underpriced. c-1. compute the correlation coefficient between the two variables. (round your answer to 3 decimal places.)correlation of speed and -2. state the decision rule for .05 significance level: h0: ρ ≤ 0; h1: ρ > 0. (round your answer to 3 decimal places.)reject h0 if t > -3. compute the value of the test statistic. (round your answer to 3 decimal places.)value of test -4. is it reasonable to conclude that the population correlation could be greater than zero? use 0.05 significance level. reject/do not reject h0. it is reasonable to say the population correlation is positive/negitive/zero

the formula of a slope:

from a table we have

substitute:

the slope of f(x) is -1.

the graph of funcfion g(x) is a horizontal line. the slope of a horizontal line is equal 0. therefore the slope of g(x) is 0.

-1 < 0

answer: no, but if it does it's a obvious pattern.

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.