PLEASE HELP!!!! URGENT!!!
Explain why the following statement is NOT true: "The day before a big election, a pre-election survey showed that Candidate A got 52%, and Candidate B got 48%. The margin of error is 3%. If nothing changes, Candidate A will win. "
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga.
Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus.
Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
If the margin of error is 3%, then A could be as low as 52 -3 = 49%.
or as high as 52 +3 = 55%
B could be as low as 48 -3 = 45%
or as high as 48 + 3 = 51%.
a=0.03 is really a small ratio, so we assume its nearly impossible for a point to locate in a<=0.03 that area, then we say A will win
So, it is possible that A is at 49% and B is at 51%,
so B could be winning if nothing changes.
Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.
You can show this by finding the highest and lowest the percents could be using the 3% margin of error. For example, if you calculate the president with the 48% as the highest it can be and the lowest it can be using the 3% and this percent is still less than the other president when the same process is applied to that president, the statement is true.
Wow! Thanks SO much, everybody! :) I so appreciate this!