Lab 7 Worksheet-Momentum

pdf

School

University of Kentucky *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

211

Subject

Statistics

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

pdf

Pages

9

Report

Uploaded by KidField4475

Researcher: Molly Tierney Data Analyst: Sahil Shah Principal Investigator: Olivia Swisher Lab 7 Momentum Researcher: Molly Tierney DA: Sahil Shah PI: Olivia Swisher Researcher(R1): The researcher is responsible for explaining the above steps in detail. Special attention should be given each time mass is used in a formula to make it clear whether the mass is referring to “the mass of the ball”, “the mass of the pendulum” or “the mass of both.”
Researcher: Molly Tierney Data Analyst: Sahil Shah Principal Investigator: Olivia Swisher
Researcher: Molly Tierney Data Analyst: Sahil Shah Principal Investigator: Olivia Swisher 2) Researcher(R2): Explain with equations, how the measurements of height and angle of the projectile launcher produced the final result, the predicted distance travelled.
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
Researcher: Molly Tierney Data Analyst: Sahil Shah Principal Investigator: Olivia Swisher
Researcher: Molly Tierney Data Analyst: Sahil Shah Principal Investigator: Olivia Swisher 3) Researcher(R3): the DA will provide some form of graph that shows the “random uncertainty” from the projectile launcher. However, the group introduced some “systematic uncertainty” based on how they made the measurements of masses, angles, and radius of the pendulum. In your personal copy of the excel data adjust the values referenced by the equations to see which of the measurements have the greatest impact on the “predicted distances.” We are looking for statements like “The .5 (unit) uncertainty in XXX caused our predicted distance to change by about # ࠵?࠵? . This (does/doesn’t) account for the differences between our predicted distances and the actual distances. What is the single largest source of uncertainty in your final results. Is this a “systematic uncertainty” or a “random uncertainty?” The 0.5 uncertainty in the height of the ball launcher caused our predicted distance to change by around 0.4 cm. This doesn’t account for the differences between our predicted difference and the actual differences. . The 0.5 uncertainty for the change in the angle caused our predicted difference to change by around 0.1 cm. This doesn’t account for the differences between our predicted difference and the actual difference. The 0.5 kg uncertainty in the mass of the ball caused our predicted distance to change by around 1.1 cm. This does account for the difference between our predicted differences and the actual distance. The single largest source of uncertainty comes from the mass of the ball which is systematic uncertainty.
Researcher: Molly Tierney Data Analyst: Sahil Shah Principal Investigator: Olivia Swisher The entire raw data is for ball 1, trial 1. DA; 1 Predicted vs. Actual Graphs DA:2
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
Researcher: Molly Tierney Data Analyst: Sahil Shah Principal Investigator: Olivia Swisher
Researcher: Molly Tierney Data Analyst: Sahil Shah Principal Investigator: Olivia Swisher
Researcher: Molly Tierney Data Analyst: Sahil Shah Principal Investigator: Olivia Swisher DA 3: The graphs above depict the predicted values of the distance compared to the actual distance received by the ball. The uncertainty principle for position and momentum states that one cannot assign exact simultaneous values to the position and momentum of a physical system. In this case the uncertainty would be the predicted distance, it is impossible to measure or calculate the position of an object. This is depicted blue dots on the graph to see how far the actual values are. PI 1: The conservation of momentum and conservation of energy did allow our group to accurately predict the distance that the ball traveled. Based off of the graphs for all three balls the predicted distances were accurately found and for balls 1 and 3 the predictions were closer to the actual distances than ball 2. PI 2: The graph for ball 1 had predictions ranging from 1.35m to 1.58m and the actual values ranged from 1.56m to 1.63m. The graph for ball 2 had predictions ranging from 1.91m to 2.07m and the actual values ranged from 2.08m to 2.20m. The graph for ball 3 had predicted values ranging from 1.76m to 1.91m and actual values ranging from 1.99m to 2.06m. PI 3: Our group did successfully determine the actual and the predicted distances for all three balls. Based off of our graphs our predicted distances were shorter (smaller distances) than the actual distances traveled. Balls 1 and 3 predictions and actual distances were closer in value than ball 2.
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