Title: The following lab write-up was based on the “Scientific Measurements” data sheet. The experiments were performed on September 1, 2016. The instructor for the lab was Dr. Larsen. Introduction: This lab was the first one of the semester. We started off with the height/weight ratio lab. It was here that the expected result for everyone around the table was 4 centimeters divided by kilograms. Therefore, if the expected result based off a different group of people was 4 cm/kg, then the same formula should be true for the people around the table. The second exercise consisted of our comparison between our expected arm length and the actual observed size of everyone’s arm. If the anticipated arm length was based off of our height in centimeters …show more content…
I observed that the beginning lab’s hypothesis was off by a large margin compared to the actual outcomes my table was beginning to form. This was a result of the anticipated ratio, four centimeters divided by kilograms, coming from a different ethnic group, whom I assumed were a lot taller than any of the people at my table. Lindsay, Morgan, Andrea, and I varied with our observed height/weight ratio, but we were all in between 1.5cm/kg and 3 cm/kg. This means the hypothesis of 4 cm/kg was inaccurate. Therefore, the group that the 4 cm/kg hypothesis was taken from must have been very tall. Along with the people at my table, I must have been of average height and weight or below. The observed height/weight ratio was below the expected ratio by more than …show more content…
This would become the calculated number of what our arm’s length in centimeters would be. Before I used the meter stick to actually figure out my arm’s correct length in centimeters, I assumed that the observed number would be very close, if not exact, to the expected. However, it was soon observed that this was not the case. My calculated number was smaller than my measured number by six digits. Fortunately, I was the biggest margin between the expected and observed numbers. One of the three other girls at my table, Lindsay, actually had the number of 72 in each of the expected and observed columns. The other two girls, Morgan and Andrea, had numbers that were off by only about 5. All in all, the majority of the expected numbers came close to the end numbers
Another weakness in the experimental design was that the reliability of the experiment was very low. As each test subject was only tested against each amount of prior exercise once, the impact of random errors is likely very large, which can be seen by the spread of the data on the graph. Although, this was attempted to be rectified by averaging the results of all four test subjects, it does not improve reliability too
The first component of the MUST involves measuring the patient’s height and weight to establish their Body Mass Index (BMI). BMI is the’ relationship b...
The results of this experiment are shown in the compiled student data in Table 1 below.
Possible sources of error in this experiment include the inaccuracy of measurements, as correct measurements are vital for the experiment.
The purpose of the lab is to understand how to calculate the calorimeter constant by using a calorimeter. This allows us to analyze the heat reaction of different substances. Calorimetry is a word that comes from both Latin and Greek. The prefix “Calor” in Latin signifies heat and the suffix “metry” in Greek means measuring. Therefore the word itself translates to measuring heat. Joseph Black, was the first scientist to recognize the difference between heat and temperature. Energy is always present in chemical and physical changes. The change of energy that occurs when there is a chemical change at constant pressure is called enthalpy. Enthalpy changes , as well as physical and chemical changes, can be measured by a calorimeter. The energy that is released or absorbed by the reaction can be either absorbed or released by the insulating walls of the instrument.
Lastly, Figure 2 and Figure 3 represent a collection of data obtained from the students in class. To determine a correlation between two variables we used the “coefficient of determination” which is also known as r-squared. Based on Figure 2, the r-squared value was 0.292. This r-squared value indicated that there appears to be no relationship between the muscle size and maximum muscle force. In comparison, in Figure 3 the r-squared value was 0.038. Thus, this r-squared value also indicated that there is no relationship between the muscle size and half-maximum fatigue
We take one potato and cut from it three even potato chips. These potato chips will never be the same weight as we had to cut them ourselves and it is too inaccurate. So we decided to calculate the percentage gain/loss as this would mean that the measurements are all on the same scale. We then weighed the potato chips on a very sensitive weighing scale. These weighing scales can weigh things to a hundredth of a gram so our measurements are very accurate.
The experiments were quite simple, in that there was a seemingly harmless task to be performed, and the participants were instructed to choose the estimation of the lengths of a line when compared to two ...
In conclusion, the title and context of the article are clear, and appropriately match the hypothesis of the authors. There is consistency between the objective of the experiment and its relationship to science. This writer found some issues in the overall presentation of information, in that the text lacks smooth transition, and was difficult to read and follow.
Aim The aim of the experiment was to compare the densities of expanded polystyrene foam and corrugated cardboard using a ruler, a micrometer, a vernier caliper, and an electronic balance. Introduction Density is the amount of substance per unit volume. The density, is a measurement of how the substance is tight together. The Greek scientist Archimedes is the person who discovered the fundamental of the density.
1. Purpose and scientific goals The purpose of doing this lab is to observe and examine the different changes we see every day in the sky. Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei created a perfect method that could be useful for measuring time. The object or tool used in this lab is called a pendulum.
There are different ways to determine your body composition and the risks that they involve. In this lab, body measurements are taken to find the body percent fat, waist-to-hip ratio, body mass index (BMI), and basal metabolic rate (BMR). Skin folds for the chest, abdomen, and thigh were taken for males, and triceps, iliac crest, and thigh for females. Age, height, and weight for each person were recorded as well as the waist and hip circumference.
Chan School of Public Health (n.d), since anthropometry tests are inexpensive, easy to measure and have a good relationship with body fat levels. Hills, Mokhtar, Brownie, & Byrne (2014, p. 340), asserted that BMI is not a test of body composition since it does not present any data regarding the corresponding proportions of fat mass and fat-free mass. However, according to Toomey, Cremona, Hughes, Norton, & Jakeman (2015, p. 32), despite the use of a measurement tool, observance to a consistent pretest condition throughout the initial evaluation, and redo assessments is necessary to decrease measurement error. By the same token, Hillier, Beck, Petropoulou, & Clegg (2014, p. 631), emphasizes the different ways to estimate the percent of body fat including its strength and limitations of each measure, but the value of initial result should be consistent, and it has to be duplicated for
...gle with our naked eye). This error can occur in a lab when he observer’s eye is not squarely aligned with the instrument at hand being used. We may have read too high or too low of a value when using the protractor to determine an angle and our data may have been altered by a very small degree of numbers.
There is also the potential of human error within this experiment for example finding the meniscus is important to get an accurate amount using the graduated pipettes and burettes. There is a possibility that at one point in the experiment a chemical was measured inaccurately affecting the results. To resolve this, the experiment should have been repeated three times.