Walter Lewin videos -- why ± 0.5 cm uncertainty why not ± 0.1?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the uncertainty in measurements presented in a Walter Lewin video lecture on 1D kinematics, specifically questioning why a ± 0.5 cm uncertainty is used instead of the commonly assumed ± 0.1 cm for meter rulers. The scope includes conceptual understanding of measurement uncertainty and methodology in experimental physics.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that typical meter rulers are assumed to have a ± 0.1 cm uncertainty, questioning the use of ± 0.5 cm in the video.
  • Another participant suggests that the ± 0.5 cm uncertainty may be a conservative estimate due to potential calibration issues, measurement difficulties, and ruler bending, indicating that it may not significantly affect the experiment's outcome.
  • A different viewpoint criticizes the measurement technique demonstrated in the video, arguing that proper methodology requires measuring from both ends of the ruler without aligning the "0" at one end, and emphasizes the importance of accurate error estimation and significant digits.
  • One participant mentions that the uncertainty in time measurement is 2%, implying that measuring length with greater precision than 0.5% is unnecessary, and suggests that the dominant uncertainty comes from the ruler's 3D shape and calibration rather than the reading itself.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriateness of the ± 0.5 cm uncertainty, with some supporting it as a conservative estimate and others challenging the measurement technique and suggesting that a smaller uncertainty could be justified. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to measuring uncertainty in this context.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various factors affecting measurement uncertainty, including ruler calibration, measurement technique, and the physical properties of the ruler, but do not reach a consensus on the implications of these factors.

benny91xp
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
here is the link to walter lewin video lecture please jump to 13:13

8.01x - Lect 2 - 1D Kinematics - Speed, Velocity, Acceleration

i thought that all meter ruler/ meter stick use ± 0.1 cm as uncertainty .how did he get ± 0.5 cm?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The ruler calibration could be off a bit, the precise position of the wires is not easy to measure, the ruler bends a bit. +- 0.5 cm is a conservative estimate.
It doesn't really matter for the experiment he wants to perform.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: benny91xp
He demonstrated the measurement improperly. The length has two measures, one at each end. He aligned the "0" of the ruler at one end of the length and assumed 0 error for the measurement at that end, then read the other end with an estimate of error...

The proper way to measure like that is to lay the measuring ruler randomly (not aligning the "0" on the ruler at one end of the length to be measured), take a reading from the ruler at each end of the length, and subtract the greater from the smaller.

In popular culture people set the "0" end of the ruler or tape measure and simply read the other end as their result. Length measures in science must not be done like that. There is a proper methodology for using a ruler, as well as methodologies for estimating error, significant digits, and rounding... and how to take all this into account when doing the math.
 
He has a 2% uncertainty in the time measurement. Measuring the length more precise than 0.5% is unnecessary.

The dominant uncertainty of the length measurement is not the reading of the ruler either, it is the 3D shape of the ruler and possibly its calibration.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K