In Physics we had a lab about Time vs. Position. (Which we found out equals speed) Using a battery-run car we were to see where the position of the car was after a certain amount of time. When it came time to discuss, we all had similar looking graphs and data. The only differences included the units the position was measured in and the difference in the time intervals. Having this "difference" in the data, didn't stop us from concluding that with speed and position it is always constant. In class, a questioned popped up as if the one of the points should be at (0,0) on the graph. Honestly, I was a little confused on that but I believe there would be a point (0,0) only if there was no error during the lab. I believe the y-intercept shows how much error occurred in the lab, and many sources of error can be found in this lab. We also discussed if velocity, had a role in this lab. We know that Speed is distance/time and Velocity is displacement/time. I believe we do use a constant velocity because we are not "changing the direction" but we are allowing it to go in the same direction. Overall, I come to know that the lab shows that no matter what, if you have a constant speed you will have a constant position no matter what.
During the last few days our class has been doing labs and discussing them, the outcomes and relationships between them. The first lab we discussed was Lever Lab, where we looked at the relationship between the mass and the distance from the fulcrum. My group hypothesized that the graph may be linear and the distance from the fulcrum may increase as the mass increases. After discussing we came to a conclusion that the graph was actually a power graph and that the distance actually INCREASES when the mass DECREASES. During the discussion we agreed that there are different ways of finding an answer because some groups may have added the extra weight of the "object" carrying the masses while others left it out. Having said that we also agreed that it was okay and that the data should be different but the conclusion should be the same.
Another lab we talked about was Circle Lab #1. In this lab we were to find the relationship between diameter and the circumference. Our hypothesis was again a linear graph. Once we gathered our data and concluded that as the diameter increases, the circumference will also INCREASE. During class discussion we found that our slopes were fairly close to pi (3.14) ! Having known that we were analyzing the data and proving that pi does play a role in the labs because of the lab containing a circle which pi plays a major role. In the end our hypothesis was correct and the graph did end up being a linear graph. Lastly, we discussed the Pendulum Lab. Our group hypothesized that the graph may look linear because the mass and period may go hand in hand. But once we had our group discussions we came to a conclusion that the periods would be same for all the data. Causing it to have horizontal graph. Our class decided that the differences between the numbers were signs of human error, such as not releasing from the same point or delays in timing. In the end, the labs showed surprising numbers and answers. Thus leading to heated discussions. All in all we had the chance to experience different situations where the graphs were not just linear! :) **QUESTIONS** 1.) For the lever lab, were masses added only to one side of the lever? 2.) When creating a graph on excel, should we create a line of best fit or try to "connect the dots" and find a power or type of graph that will do that? |