Scioly.org

dxu46 wrote: significant figures are the digits with meaning. So if your answer was pi, 3.14 would probably be accepted, instead of 3.14159265358979323846.... I would say that the number of digits after the decimal point should be standardized, but that's just me. Raw data should be in significant figures, as per the rubric above.
As for the timer issue, I don't see why time can't be measured with significant figures. Lets say you are dropping a marble from different heights and timing how long it takes to hit the ground. Your timer most likely has a string of numbers trailing the decimal point, so depending on the IV levels, I would go to different significant figures. Because significant figures help distinguish the data, if (going back to the marble experiment) your IV levels were 1, 2 and 3 inches, there is so little time to drop that the results on average are less than a tenth of a second, so hundredths and thousandths really set the data apart. (And on the contrary, if it was an experiment with 1, 2, and 3 meters, it would be a whole other story.)

masterm wrote:

dxu46 wrote: significant figures are the digits with meaning. So if your answer was pi, 3.14 would probably be accepted, instead of 3.14159265358979323846.... I would say that the number of digits after the decimal point should be standardized, but that's just me. Raw data should be in significant figures, as per the rubric above.
As for the timer issue, I don't see why time can't be measured with significant figures. Lets say you are dropping a marble from different heights and timing how long it takes to hit the ground. Your timer most likely has a string of numbers trailing the decimal point, so depending on the IV levels, I would go to different significant figures. Because significant figures help distinguish the data, if (going back to the marble experiment) your IV levels were 1, 2 and 3 inches, there is so little time to drop that the results on average are less than a tenth of a second, so hundredths and thousandths really set the data apart. (And on the contrary, if it was an experiment with 1, 2, and 3 meters, it would be a whole other story.)

Thanks!

So in this example: let’s say we are performing an experiment with a ruler and measure the following: 5.6 cm, 7.8 cm, 12.5 cm. 0.5 cm.
-should this data be recorded in the raw data table so all have the same number of significant figures?
--> option 1: record raw data exactly as measured (to most precise unit you can/to measured sig figs)
Record in table: 5.6 cm, 7.8 cm, 12.5 cm. 0.5 cm
—> option 2: record raw data so all data have the same number of sig figs
0.5 has only one significant figure, so data would be recorded all to 1 sig fig:
Record in table: 6 cm, 8cm, 10cm, 0.5cm
*Which option is correct and should be written in the test?

Also regarding the timer, I'm asking because we reported all our data to the hundredths place (ex: 1.71 seconds) and did not receive any points for significant figures. This also goes back to my previous question - should all data be recorded so they have the same number of sig figs, or to the measured number of sig figs?

SPP SciO wrote:Here's my (non-expert) take on it:

-All measurements should be recorded to the precision of the instrument. On a typical ruler, this is the nearest mm, or 0.1 cm. A timer could measure to the nearest 0.001 second. Record what you measure, exactly.

-Significant figures come into play when you're doing calculations. So you can record distance to the nearest 0.1cm, and time to the nearest 0.001 second, but if you're going to be calculating speed, your speed should only be recorded to the nearest 0.1 cm/s.

-An easy rule of thumb (are there exceptions to this? I'm honestly not sure) is that the significant digits are the ones you would need, if you were to write the number in scientific notation.

y1008083 wrote:What formats do you just use?

OrigamiPlanet wrote:

y1008083 wrote:What formats do you just use?

It could just be me, but I don't know what you mean by format. Could you clarify please?

rajidinesh wrote:Is there a single example that is like a GOLDEN EXAMPLE for any given experiment ? Something that illustrates for a given experiment a 100% scoring on the given rubric ?

I am reading up a lot of forums, but a basic example sheet would be of great help. If anyone has an example from their event that scored high, even that could be useful as well.

dxu46 wrote:

rajidinesh wrote:Is there a single example that is like a GOLDEN EXAMPLE for any given experiment ? Something that illustrates for a given experiment a 100% scoring on the given rubric ?

I am reading up a lot of forums, but a basic example sheet would be of great help. If anyone has an example from their event that scored high, even that could be useful as well.

The example that I typed on the wiki might be a start... can someone grade mine and fix it?
wiki here
I think it's right..