Harold collecting data on the daily high temperature and two cities over a period of one week here now analyzed the data and found the measurements below which statement is true

2 & 7

step-by-step explanation:

he climbs 300 ft/hr at a constant rate. the peak is at 1,500 ft.

when going up, he reaches 600 ft in 2 hours. remember, that he is going in a constant rate. divide 600 with 300:

600/300 = 2

assuming that he takes the same route back (meaning that it's a 1500 ft route back, you can solve.

note also that you are solving when he gets back to 600 ft after he reaches the peak.

first, find the amount of hours it takes to get up the peak. divide the total amount (1500), with the ft/her (300) to get the amount of hours (x):

1500/300 = x

x = 5

it takes jamie 5 hours to get up. now, he is returning down, and reaches 600 (his current destination). remember that he climbs at a constant 300 ft/hr. divide 600 with 300:

600/300 = x

x = 2

now add the two numbers together.

x = 5 + 2 = 7

jamie takes 7 hours to go up the mountain and reach his current position when descending.

(total amount/constant rate) = (time).

remember that it is a constant rate, so in total, when he gets back down the mountain, it will take the same amount of time as when he goes up. the total amount for the round trip is: 5 + 5 = 10.

~

no oblique asymptote

step-by-step explanation:

to find the oblique asymptote of f(x)

here numerator has degree 1 and denomintor degree 2

degree of numerator < degree of denominator

hence there is no oblique asymptote

when the degree of the denominator > that of the numerator, we saw that the value in the denominator got so much bigger, so quickly,   giving us a horizontal asymptote of the x-axis. or we can write

f(x) = a polynomial of x + a proper fraction.

in this case only we have oblique asymptotes but not when numerator has less degree.