Lab 1_ Report Questions

.docx

School

The City College of New York, CUNY *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

207

Subject

Physics

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

2

Uploaded by Iridell

Report
Nicole Caringal Professor Mohammadi Physics 207 26 September 2022 Lab 1: Report Questions Discuss the limitations of these methods for calculating π. Which method was the best? The worst? Are there improvements to be made? In measurement 1, the limitation for calculating π was the measuring tape. The measuring tape could only measure values up to an approximate milimeter of the objects, which were observed by eye rather than being measured as precisely as a digital tool. Additionally, the location of the diameter was approximated rather than being precisely indicated, which could further contribute to the measurement of the diameter being off by about a milimeter. The limits in measurement 2 would be the use of straight objects to form a circle, and the small area of the lab desk to form it. The limit in measurement 3, similar to measurement 2, is the use of straight lines to approximate the circumference of a large area represented on a map. The best method would be measurement 1, as it provides the best precision for measurement since the objects were round and measurable to scale. The worst would be measurement 2, as there was a limited area to create a circle with straight objects, so it would be the worst at representing the value of pi. Measurement 3 could be improved upon with the addition of a curved or circle measuring tool to take into account the circle shape of the landmark. Determine the uncertainty of your density measurement. This will involve some algebraic calculation. You can find some pointers here: Info about error analysis . Next, find an online database that you can use to lookup the density of various woods. Try to match your piece of wood with a known tree. Discuss whether you can be certain of your identification. 0.04 g/cm^3 is the uncertainty of the density measurement. With the calculated density of the wood being 0.6501g/cm^3, the wood that matched this the closest was beech. Considering the uncertainty of the density measurement, accounting for ±0.04g/cm^3, there can be no definite certainty of the identification because many wood types fall within this range for density values. Based only on your experimental data, can you say how the time for one swing relates to the length of the pendulum? Is there a clear functional dependence? What could you do to make the experiment better? The relationship between time, y, and the length of the pendulum, x, within the frame of one swing can be described as y = x^1/2. As the length of the pendulum increased, so did the length of the
time for the completion of one swing. However, some factors could be improved upon in the experiment. One would be the angle of the swing. The rope could be held up at a constant height while there would be a marker indicating an angle where the mass could consistently be swung from. Another would be an automatic timer that could more accurately start and end the timer for each swing. Is there a correlation between the circumference of someone's head and the time between heartbeats? Would you expect there to be one? There is no clear correlation, as the graph does not show a clear pattern in the increase or decrease of head size as time between heartbeats increases. There was no expectation for there to be one though since the rate of a heartbeat is not affected by the dimension of someone’s head, but by the person’s physical activity.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help