Answer:
There is no sufficient evidence to support the claim that the boards are either too long or too short
Step-by-step explanation:
From the question we are told that
The population mean is [tex]\mu = 2599.0[/tex]
The sample size is [tex]n = 23[/tex]
The sample mean is [tex]\= x = 2600.3 \ mm[/tex]
The standard deviation is [tex]\sigma = 13.0[/tex]
The level of significance is [tex]\alpha = 0.05[/tex]
The null hypothesis is [tex]H_o : \mu = 2599.0[/tex]
The alternative hypothesis is [tex]H_a : \mu \ne 2599.0[/tex]
Generally the test statistics is mathematically represented as
[tex]t = \frac{ \= x - \mu }{ \frac{\sigma}{ \sqrt{n} } }[/tex]
=> [tex]t = \frac{ 2600.3 - 2599.0 }{ \frac{13}{ \sqrt{ 23} } }[/tex]
=> [tex]t = 0.3689[/tex]
Now from the normal distribution table the critical value of [tex]\alpha[/tex] is
[tex]Z_{\alpha } = 1.645[/tex]
Hence from the evaluated and obtained value we see that
[tex]t < Z_{\alpha }[/tex]
Hence we fail to reject the null hypothesis
Thus we can conclude that there is no sufficient evidence to support the claim that the boards are either too long or too short
