Comparing Uncertainty of Two Results in Conclusion

  • Thread starter Thread starter golfz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Uncertainty
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on how to articulate overlapping uncertainty results in a conclusion regarding the power transfer ratios of two different golf balls. The 72-rated ball shows a higher ratio of 1.482 (±0.197) compared to the 98-rated ball's 1.343 (±0.287), but the uncertainties overlap, complicating the interpretation. Participants suggest that the 72-rated ball likely has a higher ratio, but significant doubt remains due to the overlapping uncertainties. A Student's t-test is recommended to assess the significance of the difference in means. Ultimately, the challenge lies in accurately conveying the uncertainty when it exceeds the difference between the two results.
golfz
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
I am trying to figure out how to refer to two overlapping uncertainty results. I have to write a conclusion and I find it difficult to explain. Even now it may seem unclear as to what I am referring to so I will provide an example. This is directly from my conclusion.

'The 72 rated golf ball had a higher power transfer ratio of 1.482 (±0.197) and that of the 98 rated ball had a ratio of 1.343 (±0.287).'

The two results 'overlap'. How do I refer to this? These are two different results for two difference independent variables.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
golfz said:
I am trying to figure out how to refer to two overlapping uncertainty results. I have to write a conclusion and I find it difficult to explain. Even now it may seem unclear as to what I am referring to so I will provide an example. This is directly from my conclusion.

'The 72 rated golf ball had a higher power transfer ratio of 1.482 (±0.197) and that of the 98 rated ball had a ratio of 1.343 (±0.287).'

The two results 'overlap'. How do I refer to this? These are two different results for two difference independent variables.

I don't know what they are looking for, but I would say that the 72 probably has a higher power transfer ratio but considerable doubt remains. The exact probability that the 98 is better is hard to calculate, so I think they don't want that. Maybe you could draw a graph that would demonstrate the uncertainty.
 
golfz said:
I am trying to figure out how to refer to two overlapping uncertainty results. I have to write a conclusion and I find it difficult to explain. Even now it may seem unclear as to what I am referring to so I will provide an example. This is directly from my conclusion.

'The 72 rated golf ball had a higher power transfer ratio of 1.482 (±0.197) and that of the 98 rated ball had a ratio of 1.343 (±0.287).'

The two results 'overlap'. How do I refer to this? These are two different results for two difference independent variables.

If you're doing a single comparison like this, you should use a Student's t test. In this case it will show the difference of means is not significant.

BBB
 
PatrickPowers, I was looking for something similar to you answer 'the 72 probably has a higher power transfer ratio but considerable doubt remains'.
I also found on the internet something like 'the absolute uncertainty is less than the difference in uncertainty hence it cannot be fully reliable'. I was looking for an answer like that however I still am not sure if that is right. There is no need to make any graph, I am just looking for a way to describe it when the uncertainty is larger than the difference.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Back
Top