Your work on the ball down ramp experiment has been received. We will look at your data later in the context of the entire group's data on this experiment.
The time required to roll the length of the ramp will be least for the steepest ramp.
If we went from least to greatest slopes, the time intervals would decrease, taking less time to roll as we increased the slope.
Right
1)1.934
2)1.891
3)2.047
4)1.828
5)1.891
Left
1)1.656
2)1.469
3)1.813
4)1.703
5)1.766
Right
1)1.407
2)1.266
3)1.234
4)1.281
5)1.25
Left
1)1.188
2)1.234
3)1.359
4)1.281
5)1.203
Right
1)0.984
2)1.031
3)1.016
4)1.016
5)0.984
Left
1)1.078
2)1.047
3)1.016
4)1.000
5)0.938
Well, I'm not 100% sure. Yes, it appears that the greater the slope, the faster the ball travels. However, I do not know how to account for the error of my accuracy in timing these events. There is a difference, but is it significant enough? The higher the slope, the less time it appears to take. Just like the pendulum, I wonder if you remove the observer's error, if the differences would exist.
Based on this experiment, it would appear the average velocity of the ball increases with the steepness of the slope. The greater the slope, the sharper the drop for the ball, hence it picks up more speed as it rolls down. The more level the plane, the less pull on the ball so it does not increase its velocity as much when it rolls down a smaller slope.
My speculation is that the more slope, the more pull on the ball to go downhill. If I roll a ball across a flat surface, it doesn't go as fast as if I rolled it from the top of a hill. It's a round object, which also adds to its ability to increase as it travels downhill.
I think more trials would need to be conducted and statistical comparisons made on the data. Or, if a more controlled experiment could be conducted that would remove the human error. I have a feeling there exist formulas for just such a thing, and can probably be run on a computer.