I Semi ln plot- uncertainty estimation

AI Thread Summary
Calculating uncertainty from a semi-logarithmic plot can lead to significant discrepancies if not handled correctly. The discussion highlights the confusion surrounding the standard error derived from linear fitting and its impact on the calculated value of J'. The uncertainty in J' should account for variations in the fitted value, leading to a more accurate representation of uncertainty. A more refined approach may reveal asymmetric uncertainties, but initial estimates can be approximated by analyzing deviations. Ultimately, understanding the mathematical implications of uncertainty in exponential functions is crucial for accurate results.
Imperatore
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
Hello there!

There is a problem with calculating the uncertainty from semi- ln plot. The linear fitting gives standard errors as you can see in attached picture. In the Y axis are ln J values, obviously. If the intersection with y-axis, x=0, then we get the point y=b=-33,21, and it's ln J', so the J' equals: exp(-33,21), ok it works fine. But the uncertainty of J' gives then value of exp(0,212), which is about 10^14 factor greater than the calculated value of J'.

What's wrong with my solution?
 

Attachments

  • semi ln plot.jpg
    semi ln plot.jpg
    49.9 KB · Views: 578
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Imperatore said:
But the uncertainty of J' gives then value of exp(0,212)
That is not what it gives. The uncertainty of 0.212 means your value 33.21 could also be 0.212 larger or smaller (there is a more mathematical statement behind it, but let's keep it at that level). What is exp(33.21 ± 0.212)?
 
  • Like
Likes Imperatore
I got it. Uncertainty is |exp(-33.21-0.212)-exp(-33.21+0.212)| equals 1,6 e-15 Is it really that simple?
 
It is not that simple, and a better treatment would likely lead to asymmetric uncertainties. But looking at the up and down deviation gives some reasonable approximation.
 
  • Like
Likes Imperatore
Oh, I should devided that relation |exp(-33.21-0.212)-exp(-33.21+0.212)| by 2, obviously.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top