Works fine on Arch Linux. I don't see that in your list.

While your argument is sound, it is ultimately irrelevant because, the different graphs of acceleration follow the same trend regardless of the given acceleration. If the time interval was cut in half and the acceleration was also cut in half, leaving a constant linear acceleration of 5 m/s^2 over a period of 10 seconds, the graph might end up looking similar in height as well. It is more realistic, in my opinion, to quickly decelerate, stop, and accelerate over a period of 10 seconds at 5 m/s^2.

Furthermore, the author assumes a constant linear acceleration of 10m/s^2, for reasons indicated here:
"D.K. was badly sick with cold on that day. In fact, he was sneezing while approaching the stop sign. As a result he involuntary pushed the brakes very hard. Therefore we can assume that the deceleration was close to maximum possible for a car, which is of the order of 10 m/s2."

For symmetry and simplicity's sake, the value of 10m/s^2 was continued for acceleration because of this. Would an uneven (i.e. non-constant acceleration less than 10m/s^2 after stopping) graph be nearly as convincing or easily understood?

May I ask what this has to do with health products?