EMERGENCY HELP REQUIRED (within 12 hours)

  • Thread starter Thread starter † please_help_me †
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on a graph with error bars where one data point does not align with the line of best fit. This situation can indicate an anomalous value or suggest that the error bars may need adjustment. It's possible for data points to have error bars that do not intersect with the best-fit curve, particularly if the outlier is at the extremes. The presence of tight clustering of other points around the best fit may validate the curve's appropriateness. Overall, the outlier could stem from measurement error or the influence of additional variables.
† please_help_me †
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Im sure you all know what error bars are, in application to a graph. Basically, i have a grapgh with error bars on the points. I also have a line of best fit. Unfortunately this line of best fit doesn't lie on the margins of the error bars for 1 point out of 9. What does this mean? That it is an anomalous value? That the error bars need to be increased?

A swift reply would be GREATLY appreciated. Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is quite possible to have one or more data points with error bars that do not intersect with best fit curve. It hard to know the situation without knowing the data, i.e. indepedent and dependent variables.

The error bars reflect experimental uncertainty perhaps, and it is possible to have high precision/accuracy yield small error bars, and therefore have an 'outlier' in which one of the error bars does not intersect with the best-fit curve. If the outlying datapoint is at the end, then perhaps a different function (curve) would be appropriate. If the other datapoints fall tightly above and below the best fit curve then, it is likely an appropriate best fit.

A single outlier could be an anomalous point, i.e. perhaps there is a measurement error or perhaps another variable/factor affects the results.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...

Similar threads

Back
Top