<p>If only they just used some classic Mendelian genetic problem with the chi squared; the way we were taught it.</p>
<p>They just expect you to completely answer the question, regardless of how many or few words it takes you.</p>
<p>@Lemonisinplay That’s what I did. I copied the 21/18/21 thing from the bananas and proved it wrong. But as I said, I’m pretty sure a hypothesis is what you want it to be. You just have to confirm or reject it.</p>
<p>I feel like my frqs where completely different than everyone one else’s. mine tended to focus more on metabolic processes</p>
<p>The null is NOT what you want it to be. It’s simply what would happen if there is NO ASSOCIATION between the side-preference and the flies and where the sugar is. Look up the definition of a null hypothesis. The values are therefore, 20-20-20</p>
<p>It doesn’t have to be 20/20/20 because the middle was not equal in volume to the two other areas, I think the density has to be the same. That’s why I used 21/18/21 because at first it shows where the flies would go evenly.</p>
<p>Hm, well I just thought that since we were not given any volume measurements, that anything other than 20-20-20 would be an assumption having no basis. You could be right thought. I thought it was a really unclear question though.</p>
<p>What the did you put for the first MC question? The second i looked at that i was just like “o crap” I guessed C
And what did you guys put for the last MC about the release of beatles and trees? i put that the beetles will travel from the water streams and reach the trees in the other 3 states</p>
<p>I dont think it really matters what your expected values were as long as it was “resonable” im99% sure that 20-20-20 works but i did 30-0-30 because the flies aren’t supposed to be in the middle, the middle is just where they were inserted but tthey are supposed to be in either of the two chambers</p>
<p>Oops my b alliekinz whatevur da ■■■ yer name iz </p>
<p>Anyways I thought the test was like a harder version of the act science which is cool I guess…no</p>
<p>I’m almost positive that you can have anything for the middle value of the chi-square null hypothesis as long as you recognize that they should be equally distributed between both the left and right chambers and that the total should add up to 60. So anything between 20/20/20 and 30/0/30 should work as long as you don’t have anything weird like 60/0/0 or something like that. No matter what the actual numbers are as long as you demonstrate this concept and are able to demonstrate how it rejects the null you should get your points.</p>
<p>What was cell x,y,z?</p>
<p>If I wrote the second free response backwards, as in giving the right reasons but justifying the completely wrong idea, would there still be a chance of me getting a 5 or is all hope lost?</p>
<p>@SoccerP I think my null hypothesis had more to do with that the distribution WOULD NOT CHANGE from 1 minute to 10 minutes,since that’s really the only data we had to go on. I hope they accept both. But I don’t think 60/0/0 makes sense, that would be more of an alternative hypothesis and even then it’s too specific.</p>
<p>See the only problem with that is, a rule for chi square tests is that all expected values must be greater than 5 to conduct the test. (thank god i had stats this year) so that’s why i’m thinking, anything 6-19 is an assumption with no basis and not suitable for a null hypothesis, therefore 20-20-20. However, the volumes are unequal. The middle volume appeared WAY smaller than either side. It was a really dumb chi square question.</p>
<p>Would this work?</p>
<p>cell x = muscle cell
cell y = lympocytes
cell z = neuron cells</p>
<p>As for the X, Y, and Z cell FRQ: X would be a cell that moves material or fluid down a certain path, because of its cilia and large amount of mitochondria e.g. inner ear hair cells. Y would be any cells that create large amounts of hormones, hence the large amount of both ER, and large amount of Golgi bodies. Z I put as a prokaryote, because it lacked any membrane-bound organelles. Anyone else put anything different?</p>
<p>Well, for the null hypothesis, saying that it would not change over 10 minutes infers that the flies chose the chambers regardless of whether there was sugar present or not. I’m sure they except both though.</p>
<p>the test was so stupid… all inference and graph. no knowledge applied whatsoever.</p>
<p>@Casaffron, theres always hope!! ^^ but what do you mean by backwards? PLus, i think the curve this year will be EXTREMELY lenient most people didnt even know what was going on with the new format and stuff</p>