cq_1_012

#$&*

PHY 201

Your 'cq_1_01.2' report has been received. Scroll down through the document to see any comments I might have inserted, and my final comment at the end.

** CQ_1_01.2_labelMessages **

The problem:

Answer the following:

• How accurately do you think you can measure the time between two events using the TIMER program?

answer/question/discussion: ->->->->->->->->->->->-> (start in the next line):

When you consider human error, I believe about 0.1 second.

#$&*

• What is the shortest time interval you think you would be able to measure with reasonable accuracy?

answer/question/discussion: ->->->->->->->->->->->-> (start in the next line):

This is just a guess, but I think you could time about 0.5 sec. If you click the mouse twice fairly quickly, you get somewhere near .20 to .25 seconds. I feel that to observe the action you are timing and click the mouse and be reasonably accurate you would need double this number.

#$&*

• How does the percent error in timing intervals change as the time between the events gets smaller?

answer/question/discussion: ->->->->->->->->->->->-> (start in the next line):

With an interval of 5 s and a variance of 0.1s, your uncertainty would be 2 percent. With an interval of 1 s and a variance of 0.1 s your uncertainty would be 10 percent. So with the same variance, or possible human error or even error with the timer, as the interval gets smaller, which is in the denominator, you percent uncertainty gets larger.

#$&*

• How accurately are you able to measure the positions of the ball and the pendulum in the initial video?

answer/question/discussion: ->->->->->->->->->->->-> (start in the next line):

Fairly accurate with only the discrepancies of the timer with intervals of 1/64 of a second. It is easy to see the timer change from one time to the next with the interval of 1/64 of a second utilizing the forward button or play/pause combination and you can even estimate the time between this 1/64 of a second interval relatively accurately to be even more accurate.

#$&*

*#&!

&#Very good responses. Let me know if you have questions. &#