A sample of 6 head widths of seals (in cm) and the corresponding weights of the seals (in kg) were recorded. Given a linear correlation coefficient of 0.948, find the corresponding critical values, assuming a 0.01 significance level. Is there sufficient evidence to conclude that there is a linear correlation?

We conclude that there is not a linear correlation.

Step-by-step explanation:

We are given that a sample of 6 head widths of seals (in cm) and the corresponding weights of the seals (in kg) was recorded.

Given a linear correlation coefficient of 0.948.

Let ρ = population correlation coefficient.

So, Null Hypothesis, : ρ = 0     {means that there is a linear correlation}

Alternate Hypothesis, : ρ 0      {means that there is not a linear correlation}

The test statistics that would be used here One-sample t-test statistics for testing population correlation coefficient;

                            T.S. =    ~  

where, r = sample correlation coefficient = 0.948

           n = sample of head widths of seals = 6

So, the test statistics  =    ~  

                                     =  5.957

The value of t-test statistics is 5.957.

Now at 0.01 level of significance, the t table gives a critical value of 4.604 at 4 degrees of freedom for a two-tailed test.

Since our test statistics is more than the critical value of t as 5.957 > 4.604, so we have sufficient evidence to reject our null hypothesis as it will fall in the rejection region.

Therefore, we conclude that there is not a linear correlation.

answer: city needs 2.4 inches of rainfall more to match the record of 40 inches.

step-by-step explanation:

since we have given that

total annual rainfall a city record = 40 inches

this year, total rainfall recorded = 37.6 inches

number of inches of rainfall   is needed to match the record of 40 inches is given by

hence, city needs 2.4 inches of rainfall more to match the record of 40 inches.

its a straight line parallel to the time axis