The mean age of judges in Dallas is greater than 50.2 years. If a hypothesis test is performed, how should you interpret a decision that fails to reject the null hypothesis?

There is insufficient evidence to support the claim that the mean age is greater than 50.2 years. i.e ( μ > 50.2)

Step-by-step explanation:

Given that:

The mean age of judges in Dallas is greater than 50.2 years.

If a hypothesis test is performed, then the null and the alternative hypothesis can be computed as follows:

The null hypothesis is that the mean age of the judges in Dallas is equal to 50.2

i.e

The alternative hypothesis is that the mean age of the judges in Dallas is greater than 50.2

i.e

Decision Rule: Fail to reject the null hypothesis.

The interpretation of this decision rule implies that:

There is insufficient evidence to support the claim that the mean age is greater than 50.2 years. i.e ( μ > 50.2)

81 seats

step-by-step explanation:

if you multiply 0.65 times 125 then you get 81.5 seats. well since you can't have half of a seat you have to round down and get 81 seats in the no children zones. that leave 44 seats outside of the no children zone.

sadsdda

step-by-step explanation: