Question

.
(04.05)

Camryn ran for 13 minutes, walked for 17 minutes, ran for another 13 minutes, and then sat down and stretched in place for 17 minutes. Her total distance traveled is a function of time.

Which graph most accurately represents this scenario?

Answer 1

Answer:

The first one.

Step-by-step explanation:

The third and fourth ones can't be right because at when the line takes its first curve (just before .25 hours) it doesn't keep increasing in height, and she walked during that time.

The second one can't be right because when she started out she wasn't immediately between 1.25 and 1.5 miles.

That leaves only the first one.

Answer 2

The graph for the given situation is required.

The correct option is the first graph.

Let us convert the minutes to hour since the graph is shown in hours.

$\dfrac{13}{60}=0.2167\ \text{hours}$

$\dfrac{17}{60}=0.2833\ \text{hours}$

Whenever a line in a graph has an angle with the $x$ axis then there is a change of the $y$ axis with respect to change in $x$ axis.

That means slope

$m=\dfrac{\Delta y}{\Delta x}$

Here, the slope of an angled line will be

$m=\dfrac{\text{Change in distance}}{\text{Change in time}}=\text{Speed}$

The slope here indicates constant speed.

From 0 to 0.2167 hours she ran at constant speed.

From 0.2167 to $0.2167+0.2833=0.5$ hours she walked

From 0.5 hours to $0.5+0.2167=0.7167$ hours she ran.

From 0.7167 hours to $0.7167+0.2833=1$ hour she sat and stretched.

The slope or angle will be more for the running sections compared to the walking sections as running is faster than walking.

And the graph will always be going up.

At the end when she is not moving the line will be a horizontal line because her position is not changing.

So, the correct option is the first graph.

Learn more:

https://brainly.com/question/18998090?referrer=searchResults

https://brainly.com/question/11606037?referrer=searchResults