#$&*
Phy 201
Your 'timer program' report has been received. Scroll down through the document to see any comments I might have inserted, and my final comment at the end.
** TIMER program_labelMessages **
** **
30 munutes
** **
It is easy to operate the Timer program. All you have to do is click on the button labeled Click to Time Event.
Click that button about 10 times and describe what you see.
#$&*
Now click on Initialize Counter, which will clear all the data from the timer window. Click the mouse as fast as you can until the TIMER window fills up. Be sure you get at least 20 time intervals.
If you miss a click, try again. Keep trying until you get at least 20 intervals without a missed or delayed click.
Copy your data starting in the next line:
1 3.635 3.635
2 4.465 0.83
3 5.34 0.875
4 6.167 0.827
5 7.072 0.905
6 7.945 0.873
7 8.819 0.874
8 9.739 0.92
9 10.724 0.985
10 11.594 0.87
11 12.531 0.937
12 13.492 0.961
13 14.382 0.89
14 15.335 0.953
15 16.224 0.889
16 17.176 0.952
17 18.189 1.013
18 19.188 0.999
19 20.092 0.904
20 21.044 0.952
#$&*
You got at least 20 time intervals. Based on your data what was the average of the first 20 time intervals? Note that you could get this average by averaging the first 20 intervals. My first few intervals were .15625, .15625, .1875, .171875, etc; I could just add up the first 20 intervals and divide by 20 to get the average. However there is an easier and quicker way to get the result, so use the easier way if you can.
Give your result, number only, in the first line, and starting in the second line explain how you got it.
The average of the first 20 time intervals was 1.0522. I chose not to use the “easier and quicker” way because none of my time intervals were repeated. I instead averaged my numbers by adding and dividing by 20.
#$&*
@&
All of your quick-click intervals were less than the mean you report.
My guess is that you included the 3.635 second interval at the beginning. That is not a quick-click interval and should not have been included in the averaging.
*@
When I did this activity the first few lines of my data were as follows:
event number clock time time interval
1 11.67188 11.67188
2 11.875 0.203125
3 12.0625 0.1875
4 12.20313 0.140625
5 12.375 0.171875
6 12.54688 0.171875
7 12.73438 0.1875
8 12.92188 0.1875
9 13.10938 0.1875
10 13.28125 0.171875
11 13.4375 0.15625
It looks like the same intervals keep popping up. For example .1875 seconds occurs 5 times out of the first 10 intervals, .171875 seconds occurs three times, and .203125 seconds, .140625 seconds and .15625 seconds each occur once.
A frequency distribution for my time intervals would be as follows:
time interval frequency
,140625 1
.15625 1
.171875 3
.1875 5
.203125 1
What different time intervals did you observe in your first 20 intervals, and how many times did each occur? List below the different time intervals you observed and the number of times each occurred. List from the shortest to the longest interval, and use a comma between the time interval and its frequency. For example my data above would be listed at
.140625, 1
.1565, 1
.171875, 3
.1875, 5
.203125, 1
Your list should be in exactly this format, with no other symbols or characters.
#$&*
I chose to average my numbers using addition and dividing by 20 because none of my numbers repeated.
#$&*
On the 10 intervals I've shown you, do you really think I managed to get a time of .1875 seconds, accurate to 4 significant figures, on half of the intervals? If you do, I'm grateful for your confidence but I'm just not that good. No human being has that much neurological and muscular control.
So why do you think the TIMER program reported that time so frequently? Why weren't there times like .1830 seconds, or .1769 seconds? Does this mean that the TIMER program is flawed? Does that mean it's useless?
The repitition of time is not a flaw and no the timer program is not useless. Though, I do not have an explanation as to why that time was repeated so often.
#$&*
@&
The repetition doesn't indicate a flaw, but it does indicate a limitation of the accuracy of the program.
*@
Here are a few more lines of data, with an added column showing the difference between each time interval and the next.
clock time time interval difference from one time interval to next
9 13.10938 0.1875 -0.01563
10 13.28125 0.171875 -0.01563
11 13.4375 0.15625 0.03125
12 13.625 0.1875 -0.01563
13 13.79688 0.171875 0.015625
14 13.98438 0.1875 0.015625
15 14.1875 0.203125 -0.03125
16 14.35938 0.171875 -0.01563
17 14.51563 0.15625 0.03125
Take a good look at that last column and tell us what you see in those numbers, and what this tells you about the TIMER program
I think the timer program is extremely accurate.
#$&*
Now initialize the TIMER once more, and take a series of 10 relaxed breaths. Every time you start to inhale, hit the TIMER button.
My results for the first 7 complete breaths are as follows:
series of relaxed breaths
event number clock time time interval difference between time interval and next
1 1569.734 1569.734
2 1582.75 13.01563 0.32812
3 1596.094 13.34375 3.90625
4 1613.344 17.25 2.70313
5 1633.297 19.95313 1.35937
6 1654.609 21.3125 4.23438
7 1680.156 25.54688 2.15625
8 1707.859 27.70313
I didn't go on because the time between my breaths kept increasing, and I was afraid if I relaxed any more I might stop breathing altogether. It's going to take either more statistical analysis to determine whether that's a real danger, or a little common sense.
Report your results by just entering your time intervals, one to each line, in the box below. If I was entering my results I would enter
13.01563
13.34375
17.25
19.95313
21.3125
etc.
Enter your results in the same format:
8.283
2.994
4.312
4.413
3.463
4.379
3.369
3.6
2.919
3.319
#$&*
If you have any comments please insert them here
#$&*
Most likely you did not observe the same exact time interval twice, and if you did it did not happen nearly as often as when you did the fact clicks.
Why do you think this is exactly what we would expect?
I think this is because when clicking we were trying to get into a rhythm with the fact clicks and though breathing is also a rhythm it is less precise because it I an involuntary motion.
#$&*
Which of the following statements do you think is the most accurate?
a. The TIMER program is capable of determining the time between two events accurately to within about .1 second.
b. The TIMER program is capable of determining the time between two events accurately to within about .01 second.
c. The TIMER program is capable of determining the time between two events accurately to within about .001 second.
d. The TIMER program is capable of determining the time between two events accurately to within about .0001 second.
Enter your answer and your reasoning below:
C. I think it is accurate within .001 because I believe the last digit is rounded. .001 I believe would be proper sig figs.
#$&*
@&
If the program was accurate to within .001 second, what are the chances that the differences between intervals would be repeated to the extent that they are?
*@
*#&!*#&!
&#Your work on this lab submission looks good. See my notes. Let me know if you have any questions.
Revision isn't requested, but if you do choose to submit revisions, clarifications or questions, please insert them into a copy of this document, and mark your insertions with &&&& (please mark each insertion at the beginning and at the end).
Be sure to include the entire document, including my notes. &#