Is a 6.03% Increase in Particle Counts Statistically Insignificant?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter calamari13
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Errors General
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on determining the statistical significance of a 6.03% increase in particle counts from 232 to 246, with associated errors of approximately 15 and 16, respectively. The participant, Max, seeks clarity on whether this increase is statistically insignificant, given the error margins that result in a combined error of ±9.72%. The conversation emphasizes the importance of defining "statistically insignificant" and suggests that further statistical analysis may be necessary to draw definitive conclusions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic statistical concepts, including error propagation.
  • Familiarity with particle counting methodologies.
  • Knowledge of statistical significance testing.
  • Experience with data analysis software, such as R or Python for statistical computations.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the concept of error propagation in experimental data.
  • Learn about statistical significance testing methods, including p-values and confidence intervals.
  • Explore how to use R or Python for performing statistical analyses on experimental data.
  • Study the implications of sample size on statistical significance in particle counting experiments.
USEFUL FOR

Researchers in experimental physics, statisticians, and anyone involved in particle counting or similar quantitative experiments seeking to understand statistical significance in their data.

calamari13
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi guys,

I have a very easy question to ask - been bugging me for a while but I keep
forgetting to ask it!
So I am doing a particle counting experiment at the moment and changing the
conditions slightly each time to see if there is an increase in the number of counts
(there should be, I'm trying to show that with the level of statistics I have it is
undetectable though). My question is an extremely simple one about errors in the
increase of counts.
Say I count 232 particles (giving me an error of approx. 15) and then alter the conditions
and count 246 particles (giving me an error of approx. 16). Then the percentage increase
in counts is (6.03 ± 9.72)% (adding the errors in quadrature). My question is, is this enough
to say that the increase in counts is statistically insignificant? Or do I need some other sort of argument?

Cheers,
Max
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You'd have to precisely define statistically insignificant.
 

Similar threads

Why Do MCNP5 Statistical Tests Fail Despite Increasing Particle Numbers?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Undergrad Statistic uncertainties in cross section plots - how to calculate?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Can Geiger Counter Ticks be converted into particle/wave counts?
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
High School Radiation detector types/physics
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
Rutherford Backscattering Spectroscopy, Counting Statistics
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Progress In Calculating The HLbL Contribution To Muon g-2
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
Undergrad Problems involving combinatorics of lattice with certain symmetries
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Thermal Physics: Photon Statistics on Bose Particles
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Dimension using box counting technique
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad About classical and quantum-mechanical statistics
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K