Graph (d) is the correct one that passes through the origin and ( 1 week, 150 g). Not pass through the origin, graph (a) passes through ( 1 week, 300 g), and graph (c) passes through ( 1 week, 100 g). Through the points ( 1 week, 150 g), ( 2 weeks, 300 g), ( 3 weeks, 450 g), and so on. This means that the graph should be a straight line through the origin and passing Number of weeksMariam has been doing exercise. “per” in the unit), and the weight lost is therefore proportional to the This “ 150 grams per week” is a unit rate (it can be recognized from the This means that, in two weeks, she lost 2 times 150 grams, that is, 300 grams in 3 weeks, she lost 450 grams and so on. It also shows in the table the two values that are not in the same The blue dotted line in the diagram shows what the graph would look like if the number ofįlowers was proportional to the number of sheets. Pairs, 2 1 = 4 2 = 6 3 = 2, which is seen in the graphĪs the three points being aligned, but that the ratio with the fourth pair is different We find that this is the case for the first three
Here, we need to check that all the ratios of one So, the answer is no, this relationship is not proportional.Īnalyzing the data given in the table would of course yield the same answer, albeit Graph here, we quickly observe that the line is not straight because it bends after 6 The graph of a proportional relationship is a straight line through the origin. We actually only need either the table or the graph to answer this question. The question is whether these two quantities are
Origami sheets used by Engy and the number of flowers she made with these, and We are given here a table giving four pairs of values for two quantities, the number of
0 kommentar(er)
