Reading pH: Is There A More Precise Way to Measure Volume?

  • Thread starter Thread starter yolo123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Graph Ph Reading
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the accuracy and precision of measuring the volume of HCl from a graph versus using digital data. It highlights that the precision of the measurement is limited by the standards used, and that converting graph points to a table may not enhance accuracy significantly. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the distinction between precision and accuracy, as well as efficiency and effectiveness in data interpretation. It suggests that if the data is well-behaved, relying on the graph may suffice, while noisy data could benefit from regression analysis. Ultimately, the method of measurement should align with the quality of data available.
yolo123
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
For b), do I really need to look at the graph to get the volume of HCl poured? Is there not a more precise way?
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2014-05-14 at 5.01.40 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2014-05-14 at 5.01.40 PM.png
    24.6 KB · Views: 550
Physics news on Phys.org
What is wrong about reading volume from the plot?
 
Imprecision?
 
When all you have is a plot...
 
? You are given 3 place accuracy for the M of the HCl. You can't get better accuracy than the standards you are working with. If you can obtain the (digital) data, then the graph would be less preferable, but converting points on a graph to a table is unlikely to improve your accuracy (as compared to precision), especially when the data appears to be (suspiciously) well behaved, as in this case. (In other words, if there were more noise in the data, then converting to a table then doing least squares regression would likely help). I assume you understand the difference between precision and accuracy (as well as the difference between efficiency and effectiveness).
 
abitslow said:
If you can obtain

Bolding mine. OP doesn't say anything about being given these data. Looks like this is a question quoted verbatim from some exam.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top