#$&*
PHY 231
Your access code was wrong. Left out the 6, here and on the next submission.
Your 'timer program' report has been received. Scroll down through the document to see any comments I might have inserted, and my final comment at the end.
** #$&* Your General Comment **
** #$&* Describe what you see on your first 10 clicks **
±45 minutes.
** #$&*Your TIMER data from 20 fast clicks **
Operating the TIMER program
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.
Note: I am using the applet as I on my Mac right now. In the leftmost column there are numbers, 1 through 10, that correspond to the ten clicks I made. The middle column seems to have a time that is relative to when the page loaded. The rightmost column seems to measure the time between clicks as when I made quick successive clicks those values get small and when I wait they are larger.
#$&*
Now click on Initialize Counter, which will clear all the data from the timer window. Click the mouse as fast as you can until the TIMER window fills up. Be sure you get at least 20 time intervals.
If you miss a click, try again. Keep trying until you get at least 20 intervals without a missed or delayed click.
Copy your data starting in the next line:
1 2.938 2.938
2 3.082 0.144
3 3.22 0.138
4 3.364 0.144
5 3.524 0.16
6 3.683 0.159
7 3.828 0.145
8 3.989 0.161
9 4.147 0.158
10 4.316 0.169
11 4.45 0.134
12 4.594 0.144
13 4.778 0.184
14 4.938 0.16
15 5.098 0.16
16 5.42 0.322
17 5.603 0.183
18 5.747 0.144
19 5.923 0.176
20 6.107 0.184
#$&*
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.
0.158s
I found this by subtracting the start time from the end time and divided that by 20. That is: (6.107-2.938)/20 = 0.15845.
#$&*
When I did this activity the first few lines of my data were as follows:
event number
clock time
time interval
1
11.67188
11.67188
2
11.875
0.203125
3
12.0625
0.1875
4
12.20313
0.140625
5
12.375
0.171875
6
12.54688
0.171875
7
12.73438
0.1875
8
12.92188
0.1875
9
13.10938
0.1875
10
13.28125
0.171875
11
13.4375
0.15625
It looks like the same intervals keep popping up. For example .1875 seconds occurs 5 times out of the first 10 intervals, .171875 seconds occurs three times, and .203125 seconds, .140625 seconds and .15625 seconds each occur once.
A frequency distribution for my time intervals would be as follows:
time interval
frequency
,140625
1
.15625
1
.171875
3
.1875
5
.203125
1
What different time intervals did you observe in your first 20 intervals, and how many times did each occur? List below the different time intervals you observed and the number of times each occurred. List from the shortest to the longest interval, and use a comma between the time interval and its frequency. For example my data above would be listed at
.140625, 1
.1565, 1
.171875, 3
.1875, 5
.203125, 1
Your list should be in exactly this format, with no other symbols or characters.
.134, 1
.138, 1
.144, 4
.145, 1
.158, 1
.159, 1
.16, 3
.161, 1
.169, 1
.176, 1
.322, 1
2.958, 1 this is not among your quick-click intervals, and was not included when you calculated the mean; should have been omitted from the analysis, though it's fine to have reported it with the rest of your TIMER data
#$&*
You may make any comments or ask any question about the process so far in the box below
It took me a moment, well 2.958 seconds actually, after the page reloaded but before I could click the button so that changed my first time.
#$&*
On the 10 intervals I've shown you, do you really think I managed to get a time of .1875 seconds, accurate to 4 significant figures, on half of the intervals? If you do, I'm grateful for your confidence but I'm just not that good. No human being has that much neurological and muscular control.
So why do you think the TIMER program reported that time so frequently? Why weren't there times like .1830 seconds, or .1769 seconds? Does this mean that the TIMER program is flawed? Does that mean it's useless?
Well for one it wasn't one after the other after the other 0.1875 seconds so it's not saying that you had that each time. It probably has to do with the way the program counts time and how many digits it's programmed to count. It's being more precise than what we can actually use based on what we are measuring and it's counting in computer time which is way more precise than anything humans can do.
#$&*
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
The last two numbers are either 63 or 25, which must mean that the program is counting in steps rather than individual numbers, or so it seems to me.
Not only that, some of the numbers appear multiple times, also explainable by the program counting in discrete intervals.
#$&*
Now initialize the TIMER once more, and take a series of 10 relaxed breaths. Every time you start to inhale, hit the TIMER button.
My results for the first 7 complete breaths are as follows:
series of relaxed breaths
event number
clock time
time interval
difference between time interval and next
1
1569.734
1569.734
2
1582.75
13.01563
0.32812
3
1596.094
13.34375
3.90625
4
1613.344
17.25
2.70313
5
1633.297
19.95313
1.35937
6
1654.609
21.3125
4.23438
7
1680.156
25.54688
2.15625
8
1707.859
27.70313
I didn't go on because the time between my breaths kept increasing, and I was afraid if I relaxed any more I might stop breathing altogether. It's going to take either more statistical analysis to determine whether that's a real danger, or a little common sense.
Report your results by just entering your time intervals, one to each line, in the box below. If I was entering my results I would enter
13.01563
13.34375
17.25
19.95313
21.3125
etc.
Enter your results in the same format:
3.431
4.013
4.96
5.514
5.486
5.529
5.263
5.512
4.904
4.52
4.456
#$&*
If you have any comments please insert them here
I guess I'm out of shape because I got a little light headed on that one, even for as fast as I was breathing compared to yours.
more likely hyperventilating, but don't take that as a medical diagnosis
#$&*
Most likely you did not observe the same exact time interval twice, and if you did it did not happen nearly as often as when you did the fact clicks.
Why do you think this is exactly what we would expect?
Our breathing is much less precise than the twitching of a muscle and we can't breathe as consistently as we can twitch either.
#$&*
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:
I think 0.01 because we see that the time is often just x.xx, as in 4.52 above. Maybe it just drops the other numbers off and I am using the applet which doesn't seem to display as many digits as the ones you have listed.
#$&*
Note that the TIMER.exe program can save your data in a format that can be read by a spreadsheet (the TIMER applet cannot do so). This will be very handy in the future, so take a minute and do the following:
1. Click on the button at the lower right of the TIMER form, entitled Click to File Data.
2. A box will pop up allowing you to include an identifying message. You should generally choose to include such a message; for the data presently on your timer that might be 'series of regular breaths time at beginning of inhalation' or something similar. Type in whatever you think would serve as a good identifier for this data and OK that box.
3. A typical Save As window will appear. Decide where to save your data and what to call it, and proceed to save it. The program will save the file as a comma-delimited text file.
4. Open your spreadsheet program (typically Excel) and choose File > Open. Browse to the folder in which you just saved your data. Below the File Name line will be a File Type line; set this either to Text Files or All Files so your file will appear. Open it.
5. A series of windows will typically appear. In the first window make sure the file type chosen is Delimited, the proceed to the next window.
6. In the second window you will see a series of checkboxes; check the one entitled Comma, in order to select the comma-delimited file, then just click on Finish.
Your data should appear in your spreadsheet, and can be manipulated as in any spreadsheet.
Copy a few lines of the data from your spreadsheet below:
Well I'm not near a PC right now but this seems easy enough so when I can I will do this.
#$&*
&#Good responses. See my notes and let me know if you have questions. &#