Mathematicians I need your help w/ Stats

I have a test tomorrow, and I pretty much understand it all except inverse normal so here is a problem that I need help figuring out (:

InvNormal:
Mean - 2.2 days
Standard Deviation - 0.4 days

1. We would expect that 90% of the bugs would die w/in much time?
2. How long would it take for 95% of the bugs to die?

Thank you (: Hopefully you guys are more helpful then the ones on Y!A

Holy moly! What grade is that work?

lol....I'm in 12th grade

I don't know

I'm trying to remember the difference between normal and inverse. I haven't done stats in like 3 years.

www.occc.edu/statistics/StatPDF/invnmdist.pdf

you can put this into google and click the pdf link. idk if it will help. it's just a bunch of stuff about how to calculate inverse normal distribution.

I don't think this is right, because I think it's just normal distribution, but here's the answers I got:

90 percent will die by 2.7126 days

95 percent will die by 2.8579 days

twelve.

Dub C wrote:

www.occc.edu/statistics/StatPDF/invnmdist.pdf

you can put this into google and click the pdf link. idk if it will help. it's just a bunch of stuff about how to calculate inverse normal distribution.

I don't think this is right, because I think it's just normal distribution, but here's the answers I got:

90 percent will die by 2.7126 days

95 percent will die by 2.8579 days

thats what I got too, so I'm putting that down I'll ask someone tomorrow at school if its right.

Thanx for the help (:

Ummm...6
and...6.3

There are different ways of outlining the basic method used for scientific inquiry. The scientific community and philosophers of science generally agree on the following classification of method components. These methodological elements and organization of procedures tend to be more characteristic of natural sciences than social sciences. Nonetheless, the cycle of formulating hypotheses, testing and analyzing the results, and formulating new hypotheses, will resemble the cycle described below.
Four essential elements[31][32][33] of a scientific method[34] are iterations,[35][36] recursions,[37] interleavings, or orderings of the following:
Characterizations (observations,[38] definitions, and measurements of the subject of inquiry)
Hypotheses[39][40] (theoretical, hypothetical explanations of observations and measurements of the subject)[41]
Predictions (reasoning including logical deduction[42] from the hypothesis or theory)
Experiments[43] (tests of all of the above)
Each element of a scientific method is subject to peer review for possible mistakes. These activities do not describe all that scientists do (see below) but apply mostly to experimental sciences (e.g., physics, chemistry, and biology). The elements above are often taught in the educational system.[44]
Scientific method is not a recipe: it requires intelligence, imagination, and creativity.[45] In this sense, it is not a mindless set of standards and procedures to follow, but is rather an ongoing cycle, constantly developing more useful, accurate and comprehensive models and methods. For example, when Einstein developed the Special and General Theories of Relativity, he did not in any way refute or discount Newton's Principia. On the contrary, if the astronomically large, the vanishingly small, and the extremely fast are reduced out from Einstein's theories — all phenomena that Newton could not have observed — Newton's equations remain. Einstein's theories are expansions and refinements of Newton's theories and, thus, increase our confidence in Newton's work.
A linearized, pragmatic scheme of the four points above is sometimes offered as a guideline for proceeding:[46]
Define the question
Gather information and resources (observe)
Form hypothesis
Perform experiment and collect data
Analyze data
Interpret data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis
Publish results
Retest (frequently done by other scientists)
The iterative cycle inherent in this step-by-step methodology goes from point 3 to 6 back to 3 again.
While this schema outlines a typical hypothesis/testing method,[47] it should also be noted that a number of philosophers, historians and sociologists of science (perhaps most notably Paul Feyerabend) claim that such descriptions of scientific method have little relation to the ways science is actually practiced.
The "operational" paradigm combines the concepts of operational definition, instrumentalism, and utility:
The essential elements of a scientific method are operations, observations, models, and a utility function for evaluating models.[48][not in citation given]
Operation - Some action done to the system being investigated
Observation - What happens when the operation is done to the system
Model - A fact, hypothesis, theory, or the phenomenon itself at a certain moment
Utility Function - A measure of the usefulness of the model to explain, predict, and control, and of the cost of use of it. One of the elements of any scientific utility function is the refutability of the model. Another is its simplicity, on the Principle of Parsimony also known as Occam's Razor.Measurements demand the use of operational definitions of relevant quantities. That is, a scientific quantity is described or defined by how it is measured, as opposed to some more vague, inexact or "idealized" definition. For example, electrical current, measured in amperes, may be operationally defined in terms of the mass of silver deposited in a certain time on an electrode in an electrochemical device that is described in some detail. The operational definition of a thing often relies on comparisons with standards: the operational definition of "mass" ultimately relies on the use of an artifact, such as a certain kilogram of platinum-iridium kept in a laboratory in France.
The scientific definition of a term sometimes differs substantially from its natural language usage. For example, mass and weight overlap in meaning in common discourse, but have distinct meanings in mechanics. Scientific quantities are often characterized by their units of measure which can later be described in terms of conventional physical units when communicating the work.
New theories sometimes arise upon realizing that certain terms had not previously been sufficiently clearly defined. For example, Albert Einstein's first paper on relativity begins by defining simultaneity and the means for determining length. These ideas were skipped over by Isaac Newton with, "I do not define time, space, place and motion, as being well known to all." Einstein's paper then demonstrates that they (viz., absolute time and length independent of motion) were approximations. Francis Crick cautions us that when characterizing a subject, however, it can be premature to define something when it remains ill-understood.[50] In Crick's study of consciousness, he actually found it easier to study awareness in the visual system, rather than to study free will, for example. His cautionary example was the gene; the gene was much more poorly understood before Watson and Crick's pioneering discovery of the structure of DNA; it would have been counterproductive to spend much time on the definition of the gene, before them.....With that said I beleive thats the answer,peaches.

Lozan '11 wrote:

thats what I got too, so I'm putting that down I'll ask someone tomorrow at school if its right.

Thanx for the help (:

WOOHOO!

My answer was far more detailed :upset:

J.B wrote:

My answer was far more detailed :upset:

lmaaao, that had nothing to do w/ the problem lol

@Raza: How'd you get that?