Measuring the mass and linear dimensions of the block

AI Thread Summary
The density of a rectangular block is calculated as 2.50 g/cm³ based on its mass and dimensions, with specific uncertainties provided for each measurement. A discussion arises regarding the correct method to determine the uncertainty in the density calculation, with one participant initially miscalculating using absolute uncertainties instead of fractional uncertainties. The correct approach involves summing the fractional uncertainties of mass and dimensions, leading to a total absolute uncertainty of ±0.05 g/cm³. This calculation clarifies the confusion surrounding the relationship between fractional error and uncertainty. Ultimately, the consensus confirms that the uncertainty in the density result is ±0.05 g/cm³.
jinx007
Messages
60
Reaction score
0
The density of the material of a rectangular block is determined by measuring the mass and
linear dimensions of the block. The table shows the results obtained, together with their
uncertainties.

mass = (25.0 ± 0.1)g
length = (5.00 ± 0.01) cm
breadth = (2.00 ± 0.01) cm
height = (1.00 ± 0.01) cm

The density is calculated to be 2.50gcm–3
.

What is the uncertainty in this result?
A ± 0.01gcm–3
B ± 0.02 gcm–3
C ± 0.05 gcm–3
D ± 0.13gcm–3


According to the book the answer is C and i am having D as answer..

my work

(o.01) x 3 = 0.3

0.3 + 0.01 = 0.13

i cannot figure out where is the mistake help
 
Physics news on Phys.org
you should add up the fractional uncertainties not the absolute uncertainties.
 
arkofnoah said:
you should add up the fractional uncertainties not the absolute uncertainties.

aww fractional error...but the question deal with uncertainty..can you start it for be i will get a better idea
 
jinx007 said:
aww fractional error...but the question deal with uncertainty..can you start it for be i will get a better idea

?? I don't get you.
 
arkofnoah said:
?? I don't get you.

the question is about uncertainty..why are you working with fractional error...please start the number...work out the first part i will get a better idea of how to attempt the question
 
jinx007 said:
the question is about uncertainty..why are you working with fractional error...please start the number...work out the first part i will get a better idea of how to attempt the question

isn't fractional uncertainty (or fractional error if you choose to go by that name) a form of uncertainty? i don't get what's the issue here :confused: and what do you mean by the "first part"?

but anyway the full solution is just this:

total fractional uncertainty: 0.1/25 + 0.01/5 + 0.01/2 + 0.01/1 = 0.021
total absolute uncertainty: 0.021 x 25/(5 x 2 x 1) = 0.0525 = 0.05 gcm^-3
 
Last edited:
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...
Back
Top