Calculating Error for Measuring y3 in Range x1 to x2

  • Thread starter Thread starter Doctor Luz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculation Error
AI Thread Summary
To compute the error for measuring y3, which is derived from the function I(x) within the range x1 to x2, it's essential to clarify the nature of the noise represented by y1. If y1 is a constant noise level, it could affect the measurement of I(x), but the relationship between the errors in x and y depends on the specific function I. There is no general formula for this relationship, as it varies based on the characteristics of the function I. Understanding whether y1 pertains to the noise in I(x) or x itself is crucial for accurate error computation. The discussion emphasizes the need for clarity in defining variables to determine the error effectively.
Doctor Luz
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Suppose I have some measures of certain physical magnitude "I" between the range x=x1 and x=x2.

I have for each x in this range a value y of I, then y=I(x)

I have a continuous level of noise y=y1.

I have I(x3)=y3 with x1<=x3<=x2.

how can I compute the error measuring y3?

Thank you
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
If I read this correctly then I(x) is a function of x for x between
x1 and x2. You then say "I have a continuous level of noise y=y1."
That's a bit confusing. Is y1 a constant? Since you had already used y to represent the value of the function I(x), do you intend y1 to be a noise on the value of I(x) or on x itself? I doubt that you intend the former since that in that case the answer would be, of course, y1. If you intend the latter, then, since relationship between the error in x and the error in y= I(x) depends heavily upon the function I, there is no general formula.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top