I have these data:

I am sorry the data is in Portuguese, and it is an image so I can't convert it to a table but the translate "probably" ( i am not a native speakers for Portuguese language) is:
- The first column is the minute that the cars have entered to my garage.
- the second column is the distinct minutes
- the third column is multiplying the distince minutes by the number of cars.
My question
how do they calculate the forth and fifth column
Without further (one might say detailed) explanation, one is entitled to expect the first graph to a relative frequency histogram (or bar chart) and the second to be an empirical cumulative distribution function (based on cumulative relative frequencies). I understand the rationales in some of the other answers, but they do not correspond to any standard statistical graphs. Notice that the number of entering cars per minute is given, but the number of minutes is not, so we have no information about actual numbers of cars. We also do not know whether monitoring was continuous or occasional. Also, certainly the spacing along the horizontal axis should reflect reality as noted by @Henry.
Here are graphs I made using R, which are standard statistical graphs for discrete data and which will probably be less mysterious to the general public than those shown in the question. (The method of construction should be clear; the R code is provided for completeness.) The mean of the 11 observations is 15.45, as noted.
However, even with these graphs, the goal of this study of entry rates of cars into a garage remains elusive. Is the concern about a traffic jam at the entrance? Or to show that the entrance rate is sporadic? Maybe showing entry rates at different times of day would be more interesting. Are these data important in their own right, or have they been dragged without purpose into a 'demonstration' on making tables and graphs?