The first two pictures offer a glimpse to the setting that we counted the pulse of the worms. Incredibly, their bodies are transparent enough to witness the circulation of their blood under a microscope and evidently their pulse. Simultaneously, and with haste our group jotted down data as we quickly rotated between Uwaila and myself to observe the squirmy and agitated worms for a precise count. The data tables of our group would be the second to last picture, which includes the mean and median of "A", "B", and "C" . I believe solution A is the neutral solution with an average of 20 pulses based on our groups data. Solution B is the depressant with an average of 18 pulses, the lowest pulse on our data tables, and solution C is the stimulant with an average of 30. The last picture depicts the averages of all of the group's data, not including ours. Basing it off of the last picture, solution "C", the lowest section from top to bottom, has high number of pulses near 30 when omitting the outliers, which agrees with our data, making "C" a stimulant, an educated guess. Now, for the comparison between solutions "A" and "B", the last picture has crucial data missing, causing the inference gathered from "A" and "B" less accurate. As a result, based on our group's data, solution "B" is a depressant and solution "A" is neutral. To keep in mind, all of these conclusions of the solutions were obtained solely from the data and from utilizing basic statistical tools such as the average. This means the data was trusted 100% to predict the solutions, however, specific circumstances could of altered the outcome of the data for each of the groups. In addition, for those circumstances present in every group, my predictions could be wrong, or as the notable Hannah Montana preached, "Everybody makes mistakes."
