On error analysis of my practical

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the speed of light using experimental data from an LED and oscilloscope setup. The results include multiple time measurements for varying lengths of fiber optic cable, with the aim to plot L versus time. The main issue is determining the appropriate method for calculating the error in the y-values, specifically whether to use the Least Square Method with a common error or individual errors for each time measurement. The participant seeks clarification on how to approach error analysis given that time is the x-axis and L is the y-axis. Accurate error analysis is crucial since the gradient of the resulting graph represents the speed of light.
Delzac
Messages
389
Reaction score
0
[Urgent]On error analysis of my practical

Homework Statement


well, the aim of the practical is to calculate the speed of light using LED, oscilloscope and varying fiber optics cable.

i have my results as follows :

L /m t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t6 t7 t8 t9 t10 taverage

5.00 (28 30 28 28 28 28 28 28 30 28) 28.4

10.00 (60 62 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60) 60.2

15.00 (76 76 78 76 76 76 76 76 76 76) 76.2

20.00 (102 100 102 102 102 102 102 102 100 102) 101.6

The equation used is c = n \frac{\lambda}{t}

We are to plot a graph of L versus time.

The problem now is calculating the error of y.

Do we use

Least Square Method( where \sigma_i = \sigma) OR
Least Square Method( Where each y, has its own \sigma_i)

We know that L is the y-axis in this case, however no multiple values of L has been taken. So every y, has the same \sigma. However, time has been taken mutiple times, do we use LSM(Where each y, has its own \sigma_i) on it? But time is the x-axis in this case.

So what should i use or do?

Any help will be appreciated. Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Anyway, since gradient is speed of light, the graph has to be a straight line.
 
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