Your 'timer program' report has been received. Scroll down through the document to see any comments I might have inserted, and my final comment at the end.
** Your General Comment **
** Describe what you see on your first 10 clicks **
It appears as if the first numbers for each on the far left indicate the number of times you click the click to time event button. The next number represents the number of seconds it took you to push the button from when it started counting. The third number shows the amount of seconds between each click.
** Your TIMER data from 20 fast clicks **
1 66.57813 66.57813
2 66.73438 .15625
3 66.90625 .171875
4 67.0625 .15625
5 67.25 .1875
6 67.4375 .1875
7 67.60938 .171875
8 67.78125 .171875
9 67.9375 .15625
10 68.09375 .15625
11 68.25 .15625
12 68.42188 .171875
13 68.57813 .15625
14 68.75 .171875
15 68.92188 .171875
16 69.07813 .15625
17 69.25 .171875
18 69.4375 .1875
19 69.64063 .203125
20 69.85938 .21875
** Your average time interval for 20 time intervals **
I got this number by adding the intervals in the third column then dividing by 20.
You didn't give your average.
If you included the 66.58 seconds at the beginning, you would get a result which clearly does not correspond to the thing you were observing.
** Your frequency distribution for the 20 time intervals (interval, number of times it was observed) **
66.57813,1
.15625,7
.171875,7
.1875,3
.203125,1
.21875,1
** Your general comment to this point **
66.58 seconds does not correspond to a time interval between quick clicks and should not be considered.
Otherwise good.
** Why did you observe only certain time intervals? **
It is not useless, but since the clicks were in order and had nearly the same time between them, perhaps the TIMER program recognized the pattern.
** What did you see when you looked at the differences between time successive time intervals? **
The differences between the time intervals was very similar especially the closer together the numbers were. This could point to the fact that a pattern is recognized, or some other similar explanation.
** Your time intervals for 7 complete breaths: **
372.3125
3.15625
3.1875
3.09375
3.21875
2.84375
3.484375
3.59375
3.109375
3.453125
** Your general comment to this point: **
** Why did you rarely, if ever, observe that same time interval twice? **
This was expected because having the clicks so far apart, the TIMER program was able to get a more accurate count instead of having multiple clicks per second.
** Do you think this program is accurate to .1 or .01 ... **
A. The TIMER program is capable of determining the time between two events accurately to within about .1 second. The more time it has, the better the accuracy.
** Copy of a few lines of your spreadsheet from the TIMER program. **
regular breaths time at beginning of inhalation
event number clock time time interval
1 372.3125 372.3125
2 375.4688 3.15625
3 378.6563 3.1875
4 381.75 3.09375
5 384.9688 3.21875
6 387.8125 2.84375
7 391.2969 3.484375
8 394.8906 3.59375
9 398 3.109375
10 401.4531 3.453125
** **
about 40 minutes
** **
I accidently clicked out of the timer before I had saved it for a spread sheet, so it took me longer to re-enter the numbers
Good, but see my notes for data that should not have been included in your analysis.