Should You Graph All Trials or the Average in a Planck's Constant Report?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Procrastinate
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Data
AI Thread Summary
When preparing a report on Planck's constant, it is advisable to graph all three sets of trials rather than averaging them first. Each trial is independent and may contain its own systematic errors, which can be obscured by averaging. Presenting all trials allows for a clearer representation of the data and its variability. This approach enhances the report's accuracy and reliability. Understanding this methodology will aid in improving future practical reports.
Procrastinate
Messages
155
Reaction score
0
I'm doing a practical report on Planck's constant and I have three sets of trials. Is it better to graph all three of them and put them in the report or find the average of the three trials and then graph it and put it in?

There are no anomalies and all three of the data have very similar results, so which one should I choose?

I need to know because it will help me in future when writing other practical reports and to be more selective with my data.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If I'm understanding you correctly, it would be incorrect to average the three trials and then plot the result. Each trial is independent with it's own systematic errors. Your result should be the average of the three end results from the trials.
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'

Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'

Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
View full post »

Thread 'Struggle to understand the concept of the question (ice cube in water optics question)'

TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
View full post »

Similar threads

Uncertainties in a set of measurements
Replies
5
Views
1K
Confused about calculating the average energy from a distribution graph
Replies
2
Views
2K
Use linear regression to find Planck’s constant
Replies
10
Views
2K
How to Linearize Data for Solar System Motion Analysis?
Replies
3
Views
3K
How Should Null Results Be Reported in an Astrophysics Lab Report?
Replies
1
Views
1K
Graphing data in a lab- astrophysics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Confusion Calculating Young's Modulus
Replies
5
Views
2K
Time Constant ≠ Time constant from experiment
Replies
9
Views
11K
Significant figures in practical investigation report
Replies
4
Views
2K
Logarithmic Regression Question (TI-84 Plus Graphing Calculator)
Replies
4
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top