How to find the value of a constant experimentally?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on experimentally determining the value of a constant, specifically in the context of the equation l = AB^{4/3}. Participants suggest linearizing the equation to find the slope, which represents the constant A. Methods discussed include plotting experimental values of I against B^{4/3} and using linear regression techniques in Excel to derive A. The importance of error bars in data representation is emphasized, with recommendations for both manual plotting and software assistance.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of linearization techniques in experimental data analysis
  • Familiarity with plotting graphs and interpreting slopes
  • Basic knowledge of Excel for data analysis and linear regression
  • Concept of error analysis and its significance in experimental results
NEXT STEPS
  • Learn about linearization methods for non-linear equations
  • Explore how to use Excel for linear regression analysis
  • Study error analysis techniques to improve data accuracy
  • Investigate alternative software tools for data visualization and analysis
USEFUL FOR

Researchers, students, and professionals in experimental sciences who need to determine constants from non-linear equations and improve their data analysis skills.

happyparticle
Messages
490
Reaction score
24
TL;DR
How to linearized an equation to find the slope
Hi,
First of all, sorry if this is not the right place to post my question I was not sure where exactly to post this kind of question.

I'm wondering how can I find the value of a constant experimentally.
For instance, I have a equation ##l = AB^{4/3}##, with a set of data for ##I## and ##B##.
If the equation above was linear I could find the slope of the graph to get the value for ##A##.

However, this is not a linear equation.
I wondering if I have to linearize the equation and then find the slope to get the value for ##A##?
If so, how exactly I linearize it?

For instance an equation like ##A = BC^{2}e^{-D/C}## could be linearized by multiplying both side by ln, I think.

Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You could always plot I on one axis and B^{4/3} on the other.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ohwilleke and Dale
Vanadium 50 said:
You could always plot I on one axis and B^{4/3} on the other.
Alright,
One more thing, in my case, what exactly linearized the equation means?
 
I must reformulate my question.
I have a set of value for ##l## and ##B## which gives me a curve when I plot it and I'm confident that this is the right curve.
However, I would like to plot the theoretical equation which is ##l=AB^{3/2}## only for low value of ##B##.
I'm not sure how to do that. This is probably why my question was confusing.
I think I have to find ##A## first then plug ##A## with my values of ##B## to find ##l## ? I'm not sure if that makes sense.
 
Here is what I would do.
Plot the experimental values of I vs B3/2. Put estimated error bars on each plotted point (I, B3/2). Draw the best straight line (yes use a ruler) through the points: the slope will equal A.
Use this value for A to create the curve over the region you desire.

If I knew more about the data I might use a different method., but you are on the right track. The error bars are a useful guide.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50
hutchphd said:
Here is what I would do.
Plot the experimental values of I vs B3/2. Put estimated error bars on each plotted point (I, B3/2). Draw the best straight line (yes use a ruler) through the points: the slope will equal A.
Use this value for A to create the curve over the region you desire.

If I knew more about the data I might use a different method., but you are on the right track. The error bars are a useful guide.
If you don't like the ruler method, use Xcel to create a table with I and B3/2, have it determine the linear regression coefficients in that table to get A. Then create a new table of I in one column and AB3/2 in the other and have it make a chart that way.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: hutchphd
ohwilleke said:
If you don't like the ruler method
I prefer it when there are error "rectangles" on the data (EXCEL doesn't do that easilly as far as I know) You eyeballs do a remarkable good "RMS" fit. But I do (or at least did) love EXCEL for data. Saved me hundreds of man-hrs.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ohwilleke and Vanadium 50
Yeah, I would rather hand-draw it than Excel. Hand-drawing gives you perspective, so it's a better place to start. Also, the error analysis doing this is not quite right, and Excel makes things look more certain than they actually are. After all, it came out of a computer - what could possibly be wromg?
 
Vanadium 50 said:
After all, it came out of a computer - what could possibly be wromg?
"Garbage in, Gospel out"
 
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: ohwilleke and Vanadium 50

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K