I Reported uncertainties for time and distance in physics experiment

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the reported uncertainties for time and distance measurements in a physics lab manual. It questions why different uncertainty values are presented for time measurements taken with the same stopwatch, suggesting they should be uniform due to instrumental consistency. The conversation also addresses the calculation of relative uncertainties for distance, proposing that they should reflect half the least count of the measuring instrument. Additionally, there is confusion regarding larger uncertainties that exceed 1, prompting inquiries about their calculation methods. The impact of human reaction time versus mechanical timing on measurement accuracy is also highlighted.
fog37
Messages
1,566
Reaction score
108
TL;DR Summary
Reported uncertainties for time and distance in physics experiment used to create error bars in scatterplot
Hello,
I was looking at my physics lab manual... There is a table reporting time and distance data which were both measured and collected (see below). My understanding is that the uncertainty for different and measured time instants should be the same because the time was measured with the same instrument (say a stopwatch) which determines the instrumental uncertainty. However, the 3rd column shows different uncertainty values for different ##t## values.. The manual does not explain why. Those different uncertainties could be relative uncertainties, i.e. the instrument uncertainty divided by the measured value...
Same goes for the distance: if we used a meter stick, the conservative uncertainty should be half the least count, i.e. 0.5 mm or 0.05cm. So the 4th column is the relative uncertainty.

These relative uncertainties are used to create error bars...Is that a good and standard procedure?

1702579551262.png


1702579581255.png


Another table I found shows uncertainties that are bigger than 1 and are different for different t values (same goes for distance). How are those uncertainties calculated?

1702580201674.png
 

Attachments

  • 1702580196604.png
    1702580196604.png
    11.3 KB · Views: 98
Physics news on Phys.org
fog37 said:
My understanding is that the uncertainty for different and measured time instants should be the same because the time was measured with the same instrument (say a stopwatch) which determines the instrumental uncertainty.
So, is the stopwatch clicked by a mechanical device with only slight lag time variations or by a human with, depending on the length of time, enormously varying lag times?
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...

Similar threads

Back
Top