Environmentalists concerned about the impact of high-frequency radio transmissions on birds found that there was no evidence of a higher mortality rate among hatchlings in nests near cell towers. they based this conclusion on a test using a = 0.05. would they have made the same decision at a = 0.10? how about a = 0.01? explain.

No, we cannot conclude anything about 0.10

Yes, they have made the same decision.

Step-by-step explanation:

Consider the provided information.

Part (A)

They based this conclusion on a test using α = 0.05. Would they have made the same decision at α = 0.10

A significance level of 0.05 indicates a 5% risk of concluding that a difference exists

From the normal table the critical value is Z(0.05) = 1.645 and we accept null hypothesis.

If α = 0.1, the critical value is Z(0.1)=1.28

1.28 is less than 1.645.

Therefore, we cannot conclude anything about 0.10

Part (B)

α = 0.01, the critical value is Z(0.01)=2.33

The critical value of α = 0.05 is 1.645 which is less than 2.33,

So we would again reject the null hypothesis.

Hence, they have made the same decision.

step-by-step explanation:

12: 00 p.m. to 7: 00 p.m. is a total of 7 hours.

4: 00 p.m. to 7: 00 p.m. is a total of 3 hours.

this means that from 4: 00 p.m to 7: 00 p.m. this represents 3/7 of what was lost from 12: 00 p.m. to 7: 00 p.m.

after knowing this, after doing 11,600 - 6,800 = 4,800

4,800 represents 3/7 of what was lost for 7 hours.

we then divide 4,800 by 3 which gets 1,600.

because we know that 1,600 represents 1/7 of how much water was lost, we just have to multiply by 7, which gets 11,200.   after adding 11,200 to how much water was left at 7: 00 p.m. which was 6,800. 11,200 + 6,800 = 18,000

this means that the pool originally had 18,000 gallons in the pool.

you can also check your work by doing 18,000 - 4(1600), which becomes           1800 - 6400 which gets you 11,600.

uhhh idk u yolo?