Question about Inverse Square law and sound intensity

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on demonstrating the inverse square law in relation to sound intensity and distance from a sound source. Participants suggest plotting data to yield a straight line, using transformations like plotting x² against 1/y or 1/x² against y. It is noted that experimental data may not perfectly align with theoretical predictions, emphasizing that proving theories is not possible, only confirming or disproving them. A log-log graph is also mentioned as a potential method for plotting, although it may not fit perfectly. The constant multiplier in the equation is deemed irrelevant to the overall relationship being examined.
Hannes
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


For school, I have to make a task about sound intensity and the distance to the sound source. I have to prove that the relation between these two is known as the inverse square law _1/ I_2 = ( _2/_1 )².
Does someone know how I can plot the inverse square law or prove that it counts for this graph?
Thanks
upload_2016-10-21_21-30-38.png


Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hannes said:
Does someone know how I can plot the inverse square law
A good approach is plot a function of the data which ought to yield a straight line. So if you expect y=1/x2 then plot x2 on one axis and 1/y on the other; or 1/x2 on one and y on the other, etc.
Does that help?
 
Yes that should normally be the plot of the inverse square law but in this case I have 0.0000002/x^1,975 and not 1/x^1.975 and I don't know how to solve that.
 
Hannes said:
Yes that should normally be the plot of the inverse square law but in this case I have 0.0000002/x^1,975 and not 1/x^1.975 and I don't know how to solve that.
Experimental data will never perfectly fit the theoretical curve. Indeed, it is not possible to prove physical theories, it is only possible to disprove them or to fail to disprove them (which is called confirming them).
So here you just need to show that the data are consistent an inverse square law, within the bounds of experimental error.

Another way to plot the data as a straight line is on a log-log graph.
 
But this fits far from perfectly and we can't find our mistake.
 
Hannes said:
But this fits far from perfectly and we can't find our mistake.
Oh, I thought you were worried about the 1.975, instead of 2.
The constant multiplier can be anything. 0.0000002 is as good as any.
 
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

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
8K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top