Record Deal Essays

8. Draw conclusions – Assuming that your experiment produced results identical to those seen in Table 4, would you reject or accept the hypothesis that you produced in question 3? Explain how you determined this.

300. 301. in 27 million years. 302. 303.

I propose that all unsigned rising artist should target the business side of the music industry to be successful in the entertainment business because it allows the artist to be taken seriously and make solid connections that can further his/her career. Learning the works of the music industry also enables a new artist to be further successful and profitable. Recent studies show that most new artists without professional representation and a business mindset have a slimmer chance in getting signed to major or independent labels (Lowry, 2011). Overall, the specific change needed is that unsigned artists should be concentrating on their careers as professionals and not amateurs, thus focusing on the ins and outs of the music business and

2. This experiment is not able to support Matthew's hypothesis. Suggest specific improvements that will allow the experiment to more effectively test the given hypothesis. Explain why these changes are improvements.

Given the following information, would your decision be to reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis? Setting the level of significance at .05 for decision making, provide an explanation for your conclusion.

2. Choose one of the research questions from above and consider it in more detail. Based upon the question, what would be a reasonable hypothesis?

8. Is it important to know exactly how old the earth is? Why or why not?

R* is the average rate of formation for suitable stars. A suitable star must have an appropriate temperature (i.e. not too hot or cold). It is possible to use the average rate for the galaxy. This can get a bit hazy, as the

As the alternative hypothesis is Ha:μ 30 we will use z-test for mean to test the given hypothesis.

c) What is the null and alternative hypothesis? Do the data results lead you to reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis?

L. Vardiman, A.A. Snelling and E.F. Chaffin (Eds.), Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: Results of a Young-Earth Creationist Research Initiative, Institute for Creation Research, Santee, California, and Creation Research Society, St. Joseph, Missouri, 2000.

Conclusion : Reject the null hypothesis. The sample provide enough evidence to support the claim that mean is significantly different from 12 .

In 1820 another French man named James Fourier took the next step in estimating the Earth’s age. He accounted for the fact that the Earth is still hot in its core and using mathematical techniques that he developed and we still use today for time-varying phenomena, came up with a number too staggering foe him to write down. He did however leave us his equations and it is easy to plug in the same numbers and get the answer that he could not say, which comes out to be 100 million years. (Gribbin, 16)

Before the discovery of radiometric methods to determine the age of the Earth, the first few attempts were off by thousands of millions

With the 1991 launch of the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), astronomers have been given access to data orders of magnitude more accurate and plentiful. In 2001, Wendy Freedman and other researchers, using data obtained via the HST, calculated the value of H to 72 + 8 [6]. Working with data collected from the Chandra X-Ray Observatory in 2006, researcher Massimiliano Bonamente and his team derived a value for H of 77.6 +14.9, -12.5 [7]. Most recently at the LIGO observatory, the value for H was calculated to be 70.0 +12.0, -8.0