Question
Use the table to answer the question.
Time walking (minutes) 20 30 40 60 80
Calories burned 100 150 200 300 400
The table shows a relationship between the amount of time spent walking and the number of calories burned. Determine if the relationship is proportional.
(1 point)
Responses
The proportional relationship cannot be determined from the information provided.
The proportional relationship cannot be determined from the information provided.
The relationship is proportional.
The relationship is proportional.
The relationship is non-proportional; the graph would be an arc.
The relationship is non-proportional; the graph would be an arc.
The relationship is non-proportional; the graph does not pass through the origin.
The relationship is non-proportional; the graph does not pass through the origin.
Time walking (minutes) 20 30 40 60 80
Calories burned 100 150 200 300 400
The table shows a relationship between the amount of time spent walking and the number of calories burned. Determine if the relationship is proportional.
(1 point)
Responses
The proportional relationship cannot be determined from the information provided.
The proportional relationship cannot be determined from the information provided.
The relationship is proportional.
The relationship is proportional.
The relationship is non-proportional; the graph would be an arc.
The relationship is non-proportional; the graph would be an arc.
The relationship is non-proportional; the graph does not pass through the origin.
The relationship is non-proportional; the graph does not pass through the origin.
Answers
There are no human answers yet.
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
To determine if the relationship between the time walking (in minutes) and the calories burned is proportional, we need to check if the ratio of calories burned to time walking is constant.
Calculating the ratio for each time increment:
- For 20 minutes: \( \frac{100 \text{ calories}}{20 \text{ minutes}} = 5 \)
- For 30 minutes: \( \frac{150 \text{ calories}}{30 \text{ minutes}} = 5 \)
- For 40 minutes: \( \frac{200 \text{ calories}}{40 \text{ minutes}} = 5 \)
- For 60 minutes: \( \frac{300 \text{ calories}}{60 \text{ minutes}} = 5 \)
- For 80 minutes: \( \frac{400 \text{ calories}}{80 \text{ minutes}} = 5 \)
Since the ratio of calories burned to time walking is consistent and equals 5 for all data points, the relationship is indeed proportional.
However, to also consider the second part of the criteria for a proportional relationship: it must pass through the origin (0,0). In this case, the table does not provide data for 0 minutes; thus, we can't definitively conclude that it passes through the origin.
Based on this analysis, the best response is:
**The relationship is non-proportional; the graph does not pass through the origin.**
Calculating the ratio for each time increment:
- For 20 minutes: \( \frac{100 \text{ calories}}{20 \text{ minutes}} = 5 \)
- For 30 minutes: \( \frac{150 \text{ calories}}{30 \text{ minutes}} = 5 \)
- For 40 minutes: \( \frac{200 \text{ calories}}{40 \text{ minutes}} = 5 \)
- For 60 minutes: \( \frac{300 \text{ calories}}{60 \text{ minutes}} = 5 \)
- For 80 minutes: \( \frac{400 \text{ calories}}{80 \text{ minutes}} = 5 \)
Since the ratio of calories burned to time walking is consistent and equals 5 for all data points, the relationship is indeed proportional.
However, to also consider the second part of the criteria for a proportional relationship: it must pass through the origin (0,0). In this case, the table does not provide data for 0 minutes; thus, we can't definitively conclude that it passes through the origin.
Based on this analysis, the best response is:
**The relationship is non-proportional; the graph does not pass through the origin.**
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.