An office building in New York uses thousands of fluorescent light bulb each year. The brand of bulb it currently uses has a mean life of 900 hours. A manufacturer claims that its new brand of bulbs, which cost the same as the brand the office building currently uses, has a mean life of more than 900 hours. The university has decided to purchase the new brand if, when tested, the test evidence supports the manufacturerâ€™s claim at the .05 significance level. Suppose 64 bulbs and the sample has a mean of 920 hours and a standard deviation of 80 hours.

What are the null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis?

Should the office building purchase the new brand of florescent bulbs? (i.e. test your hypothesis using a z-test)

This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.

The null hypothesis is that there is no difference between the two brands of bulbs. The alternative hypothesis is that the new brand has a life that is longer than 900 hours. In symbols:

H0: L = 900

Ha: L > 900

L is the average life of the new brand of bulbs.

Since we have more than 30 observations, we can use the z-test. The question is, if we assume that the average lifespan of the new bulbs is 900 with a standard deviation of 80, is the observed average of 920 hours consistent with...

This is only a preview of the solution. Please use the purchase button to see the entire solution