In the past, patrons at a cinema spent an average of $ 2.50 for popcorn with standard deviation of $ 0.90. The amount of these expenditures is normally distributed . Following an intensive public campaign about the negative health effects of eating popcorn by a local medical school, the mean expenditures for a sample of 18 patrons is found to be $ 2.10. At 0.01 level of significance, does this recent experience suggest decline in spending

There's no evidence to show that the recent experience suggests a decline in spending.

Step-by-step explanation:

We are given;

Population mean; μ = $2.5

Population Standard deviation; σ = $0.9

Sample mean; x¯ = $2.1

Sample size; n = 18

Significance level; α = 0.01

Let's define the hypothesis;

Null hypothesis; H0: μ ≥ $2.5

Alternative hypothesis; Ha: μ < $2.5

z-score formula is;

z = (x¯ - μ)/(σ/√n)

z = (2.1 - 2.5)/(0.9/√18)

z = -0.4/0.2121

z = -1.886

Using the p-value from z-score calculator attached and using z = -1.886; α = 0.01; one tail; we have;

P-value = 0.2965

This is more than the significance level. Thus, we will fail to reject the null hypothesis and conclude that there is no evidence to show that the recent experience suggests a decline in spending.

last option

step-by-step explanation:

given that δdef is right and isoceles,

assuming that side df is the hypotenuse means that de an ef are the other 2 sides that intersect at 90° and are of equal length.

because they are of equal length, we can say that they are congruent

because they intersect at 90°, their slopes must be opposite reciprocals.

only the last option satisfies these conditions.

saving = more money

step-by-step explanation:

if you have 100 bucks, and you want to buy a candy bar, even if you have one at home, if you choose not to buy it, you save.

~courtney