Anthony plants flowers from seed and each day measures the height of the flowers compared to the soil line. He records his measurements in a scatter plot. Anthony calculates the equation of the least squares regression line:

Predicted Height =0.56 ·
=
0.56
·
Days in Soil − 3.16
-
3
.
16

Use the drop-down menus to complete the statements below about what this linear model tells you about the height of a flower.

Math item stem image
CLEAR CHECK
The slope of the least squares regression line is .

The units of the slope of the line are .

The slope of the line tells you that for each new day you can predict that a flower's height will by about centimeters.

The
y
-intercept of the least squares regression line is .

The units of the
y
-intercept of the line are .

y
-intercept of the line tells you the .

YOUR QUESTION IS TOO CONFUSE PUT 1 QUESTION PER TIME

Step-by-step explanation:

step-by-step explanation:

points a and b are equidistant from the desired line, so the line you find by using them will go through point r.

using points other than a and b will give the desired line only if they are equidistant from r. if they are randomly located, the perpendicular line you create will not necessarily go through point r, hence will not be a solution to the problem.

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.