Duplicate Question
The question on this page has been marked as a duplicate question.
Original Question
A snowstorm took place during the weekend. Meterologists tracked the total amount of snowfall for the storm. For the first 2 ho...Question
A snowstorm took place during the weekend. Meterologists tracked the total amount of snowfall for the storm. For the first 2 hours, it snowed at a rate of 1 inch per hour. The snow stopped for an hour and a half, then resumed at a rate of 1.5 inches per hour for the next 3 hours. Based on the information, what scale would work BEST for representing the data on the y-axis?
5
2
0.5
3
5
2
0.5
3
Answers
There are no human answers yet.
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
To determine the best scale for representing the total snowfall data on the y-axis, we first need to calculate the total amount of snowfall during the storm.
1. **First 2 hours**:
- Snowfall rate = 1 inch/hour
- Total for 2 hours = 2 hours × 1 inch/hour = 2 inches
2. **Next 1.5 hours (no snow)**:
- This period does not contribute to the total snowfall.
3. **Next 3 hours**:
- Snowfall rate = 1.5 inches/hour
- Total for 3 hours = 3 hours × 1.5 inches/hour = 4.5 inches
Now, we can calculate the total snowfall:
Total snowfall = 2 inches (first 2 hours) + 0 inches (no snow) + 4.5 inches (next 3 hours)
Total snowfall = 2 + 4.5 = 6.5 inches
Now, considering the options for the scale: 5, 2, 0.5, and 3.
- **5**: This scale would not be sufficient to represent the total of 6.5 inches as it would exceed the scale.
- **2**: This scale would definitely not work since it is lower than the total snowfall.
- **0.5**: This is too granular and would be impractical for representing the total snowfall.
- **3**: This scale is also insufficient as it is lower than 6.5 inches.
None of the proposed scales are adequate to represent the total snowfall effectively. Ideally, a scale that goes beyond 6.5 inches would be needed for clarity.
However, if forced to choose from the options provided, **none of them would work well**, as none allow for the representation of 6.5 inches. To be practical, considering scalability, something like **0.5 or 1-inch increments would be more useful** if the options were different.
If there's any additional context or constraints you can provide, that could further assist in refining the choice of scale.
1. **First 2 hours**:
- Snowfall rate = 1 inch/hour
- Total for 2 hours = 2 hours × 1 inch/hour = 2 inches
2. **Next 1.5 hours (no snow)**:
- This period does not contribute to the total snowfall.
3. **Next 3 hours**:
- Snowfall rate = 1.5 inches/hour
- Total for 3 hours = 3 hours × 1.5 inches/hour = 4.5 inches
Now, we can calculate the total snowfall:
Total snowfall = 2 inches (first 2 hours) + 0 inches (no snow) + 4.5 inches (next 3 hours)
Total snowfall = 2 + 4.5 = 6.5 inches
Now, considering the options for the scale: 5, 2, 0.5, and 3.
- **5**: This scale would not be sufficient to represent the total of 6.5 inches as it would exceed the scale.
- **2**: This scale would definitely not work since it is lower than the total snowfall.
- **0.5**: This is too granular and would be impractical for representing the total snowfall.
- **3**: This scale is also insufficient as it is lower than 6.5 inches.
None of the proposed scales are adequate to represent the total snowfall effectively. Ideally, a scale that goes beyond 6.5 inches would be needed for clarity.
However, if forced to choose from the options provided, **none of them would work well**, as none allow for the representation of 6.5 inches. To be practical, considering scalability, something like **0.5 or 1-inch increments would be more useful** if the options were different.
If there's any additional context or constraints you can provide, that could further assist in refining the choice of scale.
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.