Propagation of uncertainty in an experiment

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the uncertainty in an experiment measuring the distance between DVD pits using laser diffraction patterns. The experimenter has taken nine measurements, each with its own uncertainty, and calculated an average and standard deviation. However, they are unsure how to combine these uncertainties with the standard deviation for a final result. A suggested method involves using a weighted mean for the measurements and a specific formula for the uncertainty of the mean. This approach provides a systematic way to propagate uncertainty through averaging in experimental results.
MeissnerEffect
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I performed an experiment using different wavelength lasers to calculate the distance between the pits of a DVD by measuring the angles formed by the resulting diffraction pattern,but now I'm unsure on how to calculate the uncertainty of the final result.

I took 9 measurements each with their own uncertainty, found an average and calculated the standard deviation, but I'm unsure of how I'm supposed to combine the uncertainties of each individual result with the standard deviation.

I suspect that I should do something like get the average of the uncertainties and add it to the standard deviation, although it's pretty much just a guess.

Can someone please help me(or at least link me a a resource) understand how to propagate uncertainty through an averaging?

Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
See http://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Leo/Stats4_5.html, for example.

If xi is the mean and σi is the standard deviation/uncertainty of the result of the i-th experiment, the weighted mean of n data is

\bar x = \frac{\sum_1^n {x_i/\sigma_i^2}}{\sum_1^n {1/\sigma_i^2}}and the standard deviation/ uncertainity of the mean is

\bar\sigma =\sqrt{\frac{1}{\sum_1^n {1/\sigma_i^2}}}

ehild
 
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