Embedded Files
INTRODUCTION
Physics, and natural science in general, is a reasonable enterprise based on valid experimental evidence, criticism, and rational discussion (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2019). Physics allows the understanding of the physical world and it is "experiment" that provides evidence or proof for this knowledge. Physics uses experiments in many different ways. One of its key functions is to test theories or hypotheses and serve as the foundation for scientific knowledge. It can also call for a new theory by demonstrating the falsity of an established theory or by revealing a novel phenomena that requires an explanation. An experiment might offer suggestions about a theory's structure or mathematical form as well as proof that the entities mentioned in our ideas actually exist.
Physics, and natural science in general, is a reasonable enterprise based on valid experimental evidence, criticism, and rational discussion (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2019). Physics allows the understanding of the physical world and it is "experiment" that provides evidence or proof for this knowledge. Physics uses experiments in many different ways. One of its key functions is to test theories or hypotheses and serve as the foundation for scientific knowledge. It can also call for a new theory by demonstrating the falsity of an established theory or by revealing a novel phenomena that requires an explanation. An experiment might offer suggestions about a theory's structure or mathematical form as well as proof that the entities mentioned in our ideas actually exist.
OVERVIEW
This course learning outcome is about the interpretations of the results obtained from the various experiments conducted in this course.
This course learning outcome is about the interpretations of the results obtained from the various experiments conducted in this course.
Salazar_BSCE2B_LR#1_Measurements and Vectors.pdfLABORATORY EXPERIMENT #1: PHYSICS AND MEASUREMENTS
The result showed that in the analytical/component method, percent differences of 0.01 and 0.0083 were obtained for the magnitude and direction of the resultant, respectively; whereas, 0.04 and 0.03 were the obtained percent differences for the magnitude and direction of the resultant, respectively, using the graphical/polygon method. Meaning, the obtained magnitude and direction of the resultant using the analytical/component was the closest to the actual measured quantities. For instance, the actual measured magnitude was 2.3 meters with a direction of 60° North of West, while the computed quantities using the analytical/component method were 2.27 meters and a direction of 60.5° North of West. This only means that the analytical/component method is more reliable than the graphical/polygon method in determining the resultant displacement. It has the most accurate result. One reason for this is a thorough calculation can obtain perfection on the measurements or results. Mistakes are seldom committed in computations since the formula is very simple. Henceforth, accuracy and precision is the strength of the analytical/component method. On the other hand, the strength of the graphical/polygon method is having a graphical representation of the vectors. It creates a visual understanding of the measurements obtained in the field. However, its accuracy depend on the drawing itself. Note that any misalignment of the ruler or protractor used might yield an error in the result.
The result showed that in the analytical/component method, percent differences of 0.01 and 0.0083 were obtained for the magnitude and direction of the resultant, respectively; whereas, 0.04 and 0.03 were the obtained percent differences for the magnitude and direction of the resultant, respectively, using the graphical/polygon method. Meaning, the obtained magnitude and direction of the resultant using the analytical/component was the closest to the actual measured quantities. For instance, the actual measured magnitude was 2.3 meters with a direction of 60° North of West, while the computed quantities using the analytical/component method were 2.27 meters and a direction of 60.5° North of West. This only means that the analytical/component method is more reliable than the graphical/polygon method in determining the resultant displacement. It has the most accurate result. One reason for this is a thorough calculation can obtain perfection on the measurements or results. Mistakes are seldom committed in computations since the formula is very simple. Henceforth, accuracy and precision is the strength of the analytical/component method. On the other hand, the strength of the graphical/polygon method is having a graphical representation of the vectors. It creates a visual understanding of the measurements obtained in the field. However, its accuracy depend on the drawing itself. Note that any misalignment of the ruler or protractor used might yield an error in the result.
LABORATORY EXPERIMENT #2: FORCE TABLE
The direction of the resultant force that I obtained was ( - , + ) which is located on the second quadrant. Its opposite location is in ( + , - ) or in the fourth quadrant, hence, I positioned the equilibrant on this location to balance the system. The computed magnitude of the equilibrant was 39.69 grams with an angle of 65.89°. On the force table, the mass used to balance the system was 40 grams with an angle of 66°. Observing these numbers, it can be inferred that the experimental values were just the rounded numbers of the theoretical values. They only differ in few decimal places. Numerically, the calculated percentage errors were 0.78% for the magnitude or mass and 0.17% for the angle. These less than 1% error means that the force table is an effective and efficient way of determining the vector sum of some given vectors. The experimental values were 99% correct and the reason for the 1% discrepancy is the estimation that has to be made in balancing the system. Furthermore, since the system was balanced despite the less than 1% error, it can be said that percentage error is already negligible. Lastly, the equilibrant is the force needed to balance the system and is always with opposite direction to the resultant force but with the same magnitude.
The direction of the resultant force that I obtained was ( - , + ) which is located on the second quadrant. Its opposite location is in ( + , - ) or in the fourth quadrant, hence, I positioned the equilibrant on this location to balance the system. The computed magnitude of the equilibrant was 39.69 grams with an angle of 65.89°. On the force table, the mass used to balance the system was 40 grams with an angle of 66°. Observing these numbers, it can be inferred that the experimental values were just the rounded numbers of the theoretical values. They only differ in few decimal places. Numerically, the calculated percentage errors were 0.78% for the magnitude or mass and 0.17% for the angle. These less than 1% error means that the force table is an effective and efficient way of determining the vector sum of some given vectors. The experimental values were 99% correct and the reason for the 1% discrepancy is the estimation that has to be made in balancing the system. Furthermore, since the system was balanced despite the less than 1% error, it can be said that percentage error is already negligible. Lastly, the equilibrant is the force needed to balance the system and is always with opposite direction to the resultant force but with the same magnitude.
Salazar_BSCE2B_LR#2_Force Table.pdfSalazar_BSCE2B_LR#3_Motion In One Dimension.pdfLABORATORY EXPERIMENT #3: MOTION IN ONE DIMENSION
Observing the graphs on pages 5 and 6 of the laboratory report, it can be inferred that the distance and time in both graphs have direct or positive relationship in which an increase in time will result to an increase in distance. In other words, as the time increases, the distance of the object covers also increases. The only difference I observed is that the uniform acceleration covers larger distance than with the constant velocity. For instance, at 5 seconds, the distance in the constant velocity is 50 meters while in the uniform acceleration, the distance covered is 125 meters. Also, the first figure shows a straight line while the second figure shows an ascending line with curve. Furthermore, acceleration is the rate of change of velocity. In other words, when velocity changes, acceleration occurs. For instance, an object is said to be accelerating when it is changing its velocity. Meanwhile, the probable reasons for the percent difference of 2.77% obtained in this experiment are mostly personal errors. One would be the inconsistency of the position of the arms holding the object. Error in using the stopwatch is common such as knowing when to stop it as the object lands the ground or maybe the stopwatch already started even if the object is not yet falling. To sum up, the experiment concludes that the acceleration is directly proportional to change in velocity and both acceleration and velocity are inversely proportional to time.
Observing the graphs on pages 5 and 6 of the laboratory report, it can be inferred that the distance and time in both graphs have direct or positive relationship in which an increase in time will result to an increase in distance. In other words, as the time increases, the distance of the object covers also increases. The only difference I observed is that the uniform acceleration covers larger distance than with the constant velocity. For instance, at 5 seconds, the distance in the constant velocity is 50 meters while in the uniform acceleration, the distance covered is 125 meters. Also, the first figure shows a straight line while the second figure shows an ascending line with curve. Furthermore, acceleration is the rate of change of velocity. In other words, when velocity changes, acceleration occurs. For instance, an object is said to be accelerating when it is changing its velocity. Meanwhile, the probable reasons for the percent difference of 2.77% obtained in this experiment are mostly personal errors. One would be the inconsistency of the position of the arms holding the object. Error in using the stopwatch is common such as knowing when to stop it as the object lands the ground or maybe the stopwatch already started even if the object is not yet falling. To sum up, the experiment concludes that the acceleration is directly proportional to change in velocity and both acceleration and velocity are inversely proportional to time.
LABORATORY EXPERIMENT #4: MOTION IN TWO DIMENSIONS
In the first part of the laboratory experiment titled “Determining the Initial Horizontal Speed of the Ball”, the muzzle velocity of the mini launcher is 3.404m/s (or 340.4cm/s). Note that this muzzle velocity is the initial horizontal speed of the ball which was determined by shooting the ball horizontally or at 0 degree. This initial velocity will then be used to calculate and predict where the ball will land when it is shot at some angle . For instance, it was utilized in the second part of the experiment titled “Projection at an Angle”, or specifically at 20°. Using the initial velocity 3.404m/s, the horizontal range (x) calculated is 178.8 cm. Compared to the measured horizontal range which is 169.66cm, only 5% is its percentage difference to the expected or calculated distance. This only means that the horizontal distance can be predicted in a projectile once the initial horizontal velocity is determined. In other words, the initial horizontal velocity is constant at different projection angles. Thus, it is used to predict where the ball will land. Furthermore, for the last part of the experiment, the maximum range 175.6cm was obtained when the ball was launched at 30 degrees angle. Though the textbooks say that the maximum range for a projectile motion is 45 degrees, it is legitimate that 30 degrees give the maximum range during our actual measurement. Perhaps the factor that affected this phenomenon is the air resistance since the ball is light and plastic. But comparing the result of our group to the others, they had also obtained 30 degrees that gave the maximum range. Hypothetically saying, this phenomenon might have occurred because of the projectile launcher itself. There might be some defects on the equipment or maybe it is designed to give the maximum range at 30 degrees angle.
In the first part of the laboratory experiment titled “Determining the Initial Horizontal Speed of the Ball”, the muzzle velocity of the mini launcher is 3.404m/s (or 340.4cm/s). Note that this muzzle velocity is the initial horizontal speed of the ball which was determined by shooting the ball horizontally or at 0 degree. This initial velocity will then be used to calculate and predict where the ball will land when it is shot at some angle . For instance, it was utilized in the second part of the experiment titled “Projection at an Angle”, or specifically at 20°. Using the initial velocity 3.404m/s, the horizontal range (x) calculated is 178.8 cm. Compared to the measured horizontal range which is 169.66cm, only 5% is its percentage difference to the expected or calculated distance. This only means that the horizontal distance can be predicted in a projectile once the initial horizontal velocity is determined. In other words, the initial horizontal velocity is constant at different projection angles. Thus, it is used to predict where the ball will land. Furthermore, for the last part of the experiment, the maximum range 175.6cm was obtained when the ball was launched at 30 degrees angle. Though the textbooks say that the maximum range for a projectile motion is 45 degrees, it is legitimate that 30 degrees give the maximum range during our actual measurement. Perhaps the factor that affected this phenomenon is the air resistance since the ball is light and plastic. But comparing the result of our group to the others, they had also obtained 30 degrees that gave the maximum range. Hypothetically saying, this phenomenon might have occurred because of the projectile launcher itself. There might be some defects on the equipment or maybe it is designed to give the maximum range at 30 degrees angle.
Salazar_BSCE2B_LR#4_Motion In Two Dimensions.pdfSalazar_BSCE2B_LR#5_Final Project.pdfLABORATORY EXPERIMENT #5: REFRACTION OF LIGHT
For instance, the arrow changed its direction because of the bending of light called refraction. Light refracts whenever it travels at an angle into a substance with a different refractive index or optical density. In layman’s term, refraction occurs as the light passes from one medium to another. In the laboratory experiment, there are three different mediums used namely air, water and glass. The refractive index of air is 1.00, the water is 1.33 and the glass is 1.50. When the light travels from air into water, it slows down, causing it to continue to travel at a different angle or direction. In other words, the change of direction of the arrows is called refraction and it happens because the light slows down as it enters the glass and speeds up again as it leaves. Note that light refracts as it passes from one medium to another because light travels at different speeds in different mediums. Light travels fastest through air, a little slower though water, and even slower through glass.
For instance, the arrow changed its direction because of the bending of light called refraction. Light refracts whenever it travels at an angle into a substance with a different refractive index or optical density. In layman’s term, refraction occurs as the light passes from one medium to another. In the laboratory experiment, there are three different mediums used namely air, water and glass. The refractive index of air is 1.00, the water is 1.33 and the glass is 1.50. When the light travels from air into water, it slows down, causing it to continue to travel at a different angle or direction. In other words, the change of direction of the arrows is called refraction and it happens because the light slows down as it enters the glass and speeds up again as it leaves. Note that light refracts as it passes from one medium to another because light travels at different speeds in different mediums. Light travels fastest through air, a little slower though water, and even slower through glass.
LABORATORY EXPERIMENT #6: NEWTON'S LAW
Shown below are the resulting graphs we obtained for this experiment. The slope of the force vs. acceleration graph represents the mass of the system. From the formula, force is equal to the product of mass and acceleration (F =ma ), it can be inferred that a graph with force on the vertical axis and acceleration on the horizontal axis would have slope of the mass. Furthermore, Newton’s second law of motion states that when a next external force is exerted on an object of mass m, the acceleration that results is directly proportional to the net force and has a magnitude that is inversely proportional to the mass. The direction of the acceleration is the same as the direction of the net force. In this activity, the force versus acceleration graph shows direct relationship between force and acceleration because of the upward trend of the graph. Since these two quantities are directly proportional, an increase in the force will increase the acceleration or vice versa and a decrease in the force will decrease the acceleration or vice versa. This can be observed in the force versus time and acceleration versus time graph shown above. When the blue line (force) goes down, the green line (acceleration) also goes down. In the same manner, when the blue line (force) goes up, the green line (acceleration) also goes up. Furthermore, the activity confirmed that the acceleration is inversely proportional to the mass. For instance, as the mass increases, the acceleration decreases and as the mass decreases, the acceleration increases.
Shown below are the resulting graphs we obtained for this experiment. The slope of the force vs. acceleration graph represents the mass of the system. From the formula, force is equal to the product of mass and acceleration (F =ma ), it can be inferred that a graph with force on the vertical axis and acceleration on the horizontal axis would have slope of the mass. Furthermore, Newton’s second law of motion states that when a next external force is exerted on an object of mass m, the acceleration that results is directly proportional to the net force and has a magnitude that is inversely proportional to the mass. The direction of the acceleration is the same as the direction of the net force. In this activity, the force versus acceleration graph shows direct relationship between force and acceleration because of the upward trend of the graph. Since these two quantities are directly proportional, an increase in the force will increase the acceleration or vice versa and a decrease in the force will decrease the acceleration or vice versa. This can be observed in the force versus time and acceleration versus time graph shown above. When the blue line (force) goes down, the green line (acceleration) also goes down. In the same manner, when the blue line (force) goes up, the green line (acceleration) also goes up. Furthermore, the activity confirmed that the acceleration is inversely proportional to the mass. For instance, as the mass increases, the acceleration decreases and as the mass decreases, the acceleration increases.
Salazar_BSCE2B_LR#6_Newton's Law.pdf
FORCE & ACCELERATION VS. TIME GRAPH
FORCE VS. ACCELERATION GRAPH
REFLECTION
Almost all of the results obtained in the experiments conducted are the expected results except for one. The last part of the result in the fourth laboratory experiment is quite questionable. The angle of projectile that gave the maximum range is 30 degrees instead of 45 degrees. I really do not know how to defend this result because even I, myself is against it. I remember that we kind of did a similar experiment like this back in high school. The maximum range that we obtained for a projectile is really 45 degrees. That is why, it is really confusing to obtain a result like this. If there is any scientific explanation about this phenomenon, I hope that I would know it sooner or maybe there is someone who can enlighten me about this topic. Nevertheless, all of the results obtained were the theoretical results explainable by scientific theories or principles. In the first experiment, I was able to calculate the resultant displacement using the polygon and the component method. Among these two methods, I found out that the component method gave the most accurate result with the least percentage error. In the second experiment, the force table is effective in determining the sum of two vectors using the equilibrant force. The equilibrant force is the force that balanced the system of given two vectors. It has the same magnitude as the resultant but in opposite direction. Furthermore, the third experiment showed that the velocity and acceleration have direct relationship. After all, acceleration exists if and only if the velocity changes. Further, the height of a freely falling object can be solved using the time or duration of the fall and the acceleration due to gravity. For the fourth experiment, it can be inferred that using the initial horizontal speed of the ball, the range of the ball could be predicted knowing that this speed or the muzzle velocity is constant regardless of the angle of inclination. Moreover, the final project showed that the changing direction of the arrows on the papar is caused by refraction or the bending of light due to change in medium. The mediums incorporated in the experiment are air, water, and glass, which had different refractive indices. Finally, the sixth experiment has successfully confirmed the Newton's second law of motion because observing the linear graphs obtained from the software, it is concluded that the force and acceleration have direct relationship to each other.
Almost all of the results obtained in the experiments conducted are the expected results except for one. The last part of the result in the fourth laboratory experiment is quite questionable. The angle of projectile that gave the maximum range is 30 degrees instead of 45 degrees. I really do not know how to defend this result because even I, myself is against it. I remember that we kind of did a similar experiment like this back in high school. The maximum range that we obtained for a projectile is really 45 degrees. That is why, it is really confusing to obtain a result like this. If there is any scientific explanation about this phenomenon, I hope that I would know it sooner or maybe there is someone who can enlighten me about this topic. Nevertheless, all of the results obtained were the theoretical results explainable by scientific theories or principles. In the first experiment, I was able to calculate the resultant displacement using the polygon and the component method. Among these two methods, I found out that the component method gave the most accurate result with the least percentage error. In the second experiment, the force table is effective in determining the sum of two vectors using the equilibrant force. The equilibrant force is the force that balanced the system of given two vectors. It has the same magnitude as the resultant but in opposite direction. Furthermore, the third experiment showed that the velocity and acceleration have direct relationship. After all, acceleration exists if and only if the velocity changes. Further, the height of a freely falling object can be solved using the time or duration of the fall and the acceleration due to gravity. For the fourth experiment, it can be inferred that using the initial horizontal speed of the ball, the range of the ball could be predicted knowing that this speed or the muzzle velocity is constant regardless of the angle of inclination. Moreover, the final project showed that the changing direction of the arrows on the papar is caused by refraction or the bending of light due to change in medium. The mediums incorporated in the experiment are air, water, and glass, which had different refractive indices. Finally, the sixth experiment has successfully confirmed the Newton's second law of motion because observing the linear graphs obtained from the software, it is concluded that the force and acceleration have direct relationship to each other.
REFERENCES:
https://res.allmacwallpaper.com/get/Retina-MacBook-Air-13-inch-wallpapers/Charm-of-the-universe-2560x1600/3781-11.jpghttps://wallpaperaccess.com/full/53084.jpg https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physics-experiment/https://i.pinimg.com/originals/32/96/9c/32969c8d097e908ffa28514c98253454.jpghttps://wallpaperaccess.com/full/4149226.jpghttps://i.pinimg.com/originals/5c/ad/e6/5cade6da6c5e0eed3bc7f59e03c36c42.jpghttps://cutewallpaper.org/cdn-cgi/mirage/dd19f2d06ebc24f541f142b37b4289ffa7de722a7607e39984c5c6dd4ce8defd/1280/27x/1vzl6pojd/142661618.jpghttps://t4.ftcdn.net/jpg/02/98/68/73/360_F_298687332_D0GAA6fAgr70NWtF8UKXPyLx0mTGug0x.jpghttps://i.pinimg.com/originals/ff/cf/d1/ffcfd1e82699b5b51e2f20438a9d8ccc.jpghttps://images4.alphacoders.com/652/thumb-1920-652737.jpg
Page updated
Report abuse