It's c bro, .2x5 equals 1, which accounts for the 1m/s accelerations.
<span> Given the relationship between </span>wavelength<span> and </span>frequency<span> — the </span>higher<span>the </span>frequency<span>, the shorter the </span>wavelength<span> — it follows that short wavelengths are</span>more<span> energetic than long wavelengths.</span>
<u>S</u><u>o</u><u>l</u><u>u</u><u>t</u><u>i</u><u>o</u><u>n</u><u>-</u><u>1</u><u>:</u><u>-</u>

<u>S</u><u>o</u><u>l</u><u>u</u><u>t</u><u>i</u><u>o</u><u>n</u><u>:</u><u>-</u><u>2</u>

<u>S</u><u>o</u><u>l</u><u>u</u><u>t</u><u>i</u><u>o</u><u>n</u><u>:</u><u>-</u><u>3</u>

<u>S</u><u>o</u><u>l</u><u>u</u><u>t</u><u>i</u><u>o</u><u>n</u><u>:</u><u>-</u><u>4</u>

<u>S</u><u>o</u><u>l</u><u>u</u><u>t</u><u>i</u><u>o</u><u>n</u><u>:</u><u>-</u><u>5</u>

<u>S</u><u>o</u><u>l</u><u>u</u><u>t</u><u>i</u><u>o</u><u>n</u><u>:</u><u>-</u><u>6</u>

<u>S</u><u>o</u><u>l</u><u>u</u><u>t</u><u>i</u><u>o</u><u>n</u><u>:</u><u>-</u><u>7</u>

<u>S</u><u>o</u><u>l</u><u>u</u><u>t</u><u>i</u><u>o</u><u>n</u><u>:</u><u>-</u><u>8</u>

<u>S</u><u>o</u><u>l</u><u>u</u><u>t</u><u>i</u><u>o</u><u>n</u><u>:</u><u>-</u><u>9</u>

<u>S</u><u>o</u><u>l</u><u>u</u><u>t</u><u>i</u><u>o</u><u>n</u><u>:</u><u>-</u><u>10</u>

Answer:
D. 15 m/s downward
Explanation:
v = at + v₀
v = (-9.8 m/s²) (1.5 s) + (0 m/s)
v = -14.7 m/s
Rounded to two significant figures, the answer is D, 15 m/s downward.