Physics Lab Uncertainties: Natural Log Method

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on using the natural log method to calculate uncertainties in a physics lab related to calorimetry. The user seeks clarification on simplifying their equation to facilitate taking partial derivatives. They express confidence in mastering the process once they understand it but are struggling specifically with the denominator components. There is uncertainty about whether this approach is appropriate or if alternative methods should be considered for calculating uncertainties. Overall, the user is looking for guidance on the correct application of the natural log method in their lab work.
CINA
Messages
60
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I'm doing a physics lab and need to do the uncertainties, and the method I'm using is the natural log method, hich goes like this:
(equation used was k*(x^a)*(y^b)*(z^c) )
http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/3663/lnform.jpg

The equation I'm doing:

http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/4214/40303282.jpg

I'm just wondering how it simplifies (the right most part of the first picture) so that I can take the partial dervs. (The Inside of ln is my actualy equation, calorimetry.)



Homework Equations



I don't know, otherwise I would apply them!

The Attempt at a Solution



It's a pretty straight foward problem, once I see it down once I think I can do it all the time in the future. The main problem I am having is dealing with the things in the denominator.

Thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
No one!? Is this not the correct approach? Would someone else use a different method to get an equation for the uncertainty?
 

Thread 'Errors and significant figures'

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...
View full post »
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

Ln Simplification: Physics Lab w/ Calorimetry Uncertainties
Replies
7
Views
4K
Physics Lab Propagation of Error Issue
Replies
13
Views
2K
Experimental Uncertainty - uncertainty in impact position
Replies
2
Views
2K
How to appropriately assign sigma values (uncertainty)
Replies
9
Views
2K
How Do I Calculate Uncertainty in My Physics Lab Report?
Replies
17
Views
10K
Intermediate Physics Lab Analysis, Uncertainty and Linear Regression
Replies
1
Views
3K
What is the percentage uncertainty in V when L1-L2 is 30?
Replies
4
Views
2K
Kinematics physics lab help sources of error
Replies
1
Views
4K
How Should Time and Distance Uncertainties Affect Calculations in Physics Labs?
Replies
3
Views
2K
Calculate Physics Lab Uncertainty: Ekrot, Moment of Inertia, Angular Velocity
Replies
4
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top