Propagation of error: exponents

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the propagation of error in mathematical expressions, particularly focusing on the differences between handling uncertainties in products versus powers. It highlights that the standard quadrature method for combining uncertainties applies only when the uncertainties are independent. For example, measuring two sides of a rectangle allows for independent uncertainties, justifying the quadrature method. However, when calculating the area of a square from a single side measurement, the uncertainties are not independent, making the quadrature method inappropriate. The conversation also mentions the value of John R. Taylor's book, "An Introduction to Error Analysis," as a helpful resource for learning about experimental uncertainty and statistics. Additionally, there is a suggestion to explore a statistics subforum for further questions on this topic.
AndrewBworth
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
Hi all. I have been trying to understand propagation of error of exponents. Most an. Chem textbooks I see say y = a^x, sy/y = (sa/a)*x. But say y = a*b, then sy/y = ((sa/a)^2 + (sb/b)^2)^.5 . if a = b then sy/y= (2*(sa/a)^2)^.5 = 2^.5*abs(sa/a). This shows the rule y=a^x, sy/y= x^.5*abs(sa/a).
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
I think I understand your question. You are asking why the standard way of representing uncertainty in a product (the so-called quadrature method of addition) does not apply to powers.

The most straightforward way to explain this that I've seen may satisfy you. Recall that the quadrature method only applies to uncertainties that are independent of each other. Take a simple example of measuring two sides of a rectangle - the uncertainty in your first measurement is independent of the uncertainty of the second measurement. It is therefore preferable to state the uncertainty in the area of the rectangle using the quadrature method.

Contrast this with measuring only one side of a square and calculating its area. In this circumstance the calculation involves multiplying the same value together and the uncertainties are clearly no longer independent; the quadrature method is not justifiable in this circumstance.
 
Thank you! I guess I have a thing or two to learn about statistics.
 
You're welcome. One book that I found extremely useful for the basics of dealing with experimental uncertainty is John R. Taylor's An Introduction to Error Analysis. I would definitely recommend checking it out. I ended up buying a copy.
 
We also have a statistics subforum for this kind of questions.
 
It seems like a simple enough question: what is the solubility of epsom salt in water at 20°C? A graph or table showing how it varies with temperature would be a bonus. But upon searching the internet I have been unable to determine this with confidence. Wikipedia gives the value of 113g/100ml. But other sources disagree and I can't find a definitive source for the information. I even asked chatgpt but it couldn't be sure either. I thought, naively, that this would be easy to look up without...
I was introduced to the Octet Rule recently and make me wonder, why does 8 valence electrons or a full p orbital always make an element inert? What is so special with a full p orbital? Like take Calcium for an example, its outer orbital is filled but its only the s orbital thats filled so its still reactive not so much as the Alkaline metals but still pretty reactive. Can someone explain it to me? Thanks!!

Similar threads

Back
Top