What happens to uncertainty when I divide values by a constant and squ

Click For Summary
When dividing the wire thickness values by two to calculate the radius, the uncertainty of +/- 0.01 mm is also halved, resulting in +/- 0.005 mm for the radius. When squaring the radius to find the cross-sectional area, the uncertainty doubles, leading to an uncertainty of +/- 0.01 mm for the area calculation. The propagation of uncertainty follows specific rules: for multiplication and division, relative errors are added quadratically, while squaring a value doubles the relative error. The discussion highlights that the uncertainty in measurements is directly affected by the mathematical operations performed on them. Understanding these principles is crucial for accurate physics investigations.
Akbar123
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
The values below are different wire thicknesses measured with a micrometer screw gauge. The uncertainty of it is +/- 0.01mm.

Diameter/thickness of wire/mm
0.02
0.10
0.14
0.30
0.42

I need to halve (or divide by two) these values to calculate radius and hence calculate cross sectional area of the wires. What happens to the uncertainty of +/- 0.01mm.

In addition what happens to the uncertainty of the radius when I square these values using the equation area of circle = πr2 ?

This is for a physics investigation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You calculate cross section with ## a = {\pi\over 4} d^2##.
Propagation of independent uncertainties works as follows:
$$\bigl ( \Delta f(x_1, x_2, x_3 ... x_N) \bigr )^2 = \Sigma_{i=1}^N \ ({\partial f \over \partial x_i})^2 (\Delta x_i)^2$$
Examples:
##f = a\,x \quad \Rightarrow \quad \Delta f = |a|\,\Delta x \quad ## or: ## \quad {\Delta f \over f} = |a|\,{\Delta x\over x} ##
##f = x_1 + x_2 \quad \Rightarrow \quad (\Delta f)^2 = (\Delta x_1)^2 + (\Delta x_2)^2##
##f = x_1 \times x_2 \quad \Rightarrow \quad (\Delta f)^2 = x_2^2 (\Delta x_1)^2 + x_1^2(\Delta x_2)^2 \quad \Rightarrow \quad ({\Delta f\over f})^2 = ({\Delta x_1 \over x_1})^2 + ({\Delta x_2 \over x_2})^2 ##
but ##f = x_1^2 \quad \Rightarrow \quad (\Delta f)^2 = 4 x_1^2 (\Delta x_1)^2 \quad \Rightarrow \quad ({\Delta f\over f}) = 2 ({\Delta x_1 \over x_1}) ##

In short:
addition and subtraction: add absolute errors quadratically
multiplication and division: add relative errors quadratically
squares: double relative error, square root: halve relative error

In your case ##{\Delta a \over a }= 2 {\Delta d \over d}##
 
You would also divide the uncertainty (or error) by 2. If you make the measurement smaller, you also make the associated uncertainty with that measurement smaller, in this case x2 smaller. Squaring the r value will result in the uncertainty being doubled. So your ## r^2 ## will actually just be +/- 0.01 mm uncertainty. If it was the diameter squared, the uncertainty would be doubled, so +/- 0.02 mm .
 
patrickmoloney said:
Squaring the r value will result in the uncertainty being doubled
Demonstrably incorrect: ##(10 \pm 1)^2 = 100 \pm 20 \quad ##(*) and not ## 100 \pm 2##

What he means is that the relative error is doubled.

(*) here you see the effect of taking only the first derivative and ignoring the higher orders. It's a small effect, given that this shows up marginally (namely 1%) even at a 10% relative error.
 
The book claims the answer is that all the magnitudes are the same because "the gravitational force on the penguin is the same". I'm having trouble understanding this. I thought the buoyant force was equal to the weight of the fluid displaced. Weight depends on mass which depends on density. Therefore, due to the differing densities the buoyant force will be different in each case? Is this incorrect?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
22
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
9K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
45K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
6K