You are a group of scientists who are a member of an elite crime scene investigation unit who focus on traffic accidents. You have been called to the scene of an accident between two cars. Your initial assessment allows you to come to the conclusion that one of the cars has obviously run into the back of the other. Your team finds brake marks on the road. After examining the scene of the accident you conclude that one of the cars, a Volkswagen New Beetle was parked with its handbrake on and only the driver in it before the accident, while the other car, an Audi tt had a single male occupant (33 years old) who crashed into the back of the Beetle. Both cars were empty except for their drivers. The point on the road where the impact took place is indicated and you notice brake marks leading up to the impact and brake marks after the impact. After the impact, the cars were stuck together. The accident took place in a 40 mph zone and the road was dry. It is your task to determine if the person driving the Audi was speeding. There is a technical expert at the scene of the accident who will make any measurements you ask for.

You want to double-check your findings as you are sure to be called as an expert witness. Your esteemed colleague Dr. Elizabeth Shaw suggests solving the problem from an energy perspective rather than a momentum perspective to check your results.

The Audi TT drivers lawyer feels as if they have come up with a foolproof scientific argument as to why their client was speeding. They indicate that the car was actually traveling up an incline of 8 degrees when it started breaking. You have been brought in as an expert witness to indicate whether this is true or not.