Ah I see, I'll just include that as an error because I didn't measure that value as well.
I've plotted the results and they look MUCH better than the first time, however, the percentage errors do not follow a pattern like I had expected them to:
0.05: 2.145%
0.10: -0.483%
0.15: -1.749%
0.20...
I see, thank you! I've plotted the results and they seem MUCH better than before! Is there are any particular reason that the 0.05cm pendulum length yielded the most in
Ah I see, thank you! Also, according to this site (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/icyl.html), shouldn't the mass...
I think I understand all the components, however I do have one last question (sorry): I understand that the torque is τ=mghsin(θ) but I do not understand why we are multiplying the masses by both X and (L/2)-D instead of only X.
Haruspex, thank you very much for this! I'm truly grateful!
If you don't mind me asking, for the formula that you have provided for the bob; is that for a cylindrical bob?
Thank you so much once again!
I understand that intermolecular forces of attraction are stronger in alcohol and carboxylic acid but it doesn't make sense then that the ester would have a higher boiling point?
Why does 3-methylbutyl ethanoate have a higher boiling point than 3-methylbutan-1-ol and ethanoic acid?
Attempt at a solution: I know that the ester has a marginally greater molar mass but I wasn't sure if this is the only deciding factor, particularly considering the strength of the other...
But if I was investigating the effect of length of the pendulum on its period, where would I include these lengths? Or is it related to the center of mass?
I'm so sorry, I'm pretty hopeless at this, it's far beyond the scope of our curriculum (but it's a design investigation).
The bob is cylinderical and thus the radius is the 'face' of the cylinder (not the length). The rod does project up above the pivot point, however, I did not measure this but from memory, it is approximately 5cm, so 0.05m which is NOT included in the 0.357m.
So far, this is the formula that I...
Oops, I'm very sorry, my data was all over the place. Here are the final measurements, please ignore previous values:
rod mass: 0.030kg
rod radius: 0.357m = 35.7cm
bob mass: 0.076kg
bob radius: 0.011m = 1.1cm
The rod is: 0.357m and 0.067kg
The mass at the end is: 0.03kg with a radius of 0.005m
As the point mass is greater than the mass of the rod, is it possible for this pendulum to be a simple pendulum in any respects? Or is definitely a physical pendulum?
So I did some more research and conducted more measurements. The mass of the weight at the end of the pendulum is 0.076kg and the pendulum rod itself is 0.030kg. I think the equation for the physical pendulum refers to the mass of the rod however how could I incorporate the mass of the weight as...
No the pendulum wasn't tilted, it was just straight and was instead attached to a retort stand. I didn't realize that the mass of the pendulum would affect its period -what formula would that relate to? Yes, we did shift the golden mass along the rod and the length of our pendulum was...
It's weird because the greater the length of the pendulum, the more accurate the g value became. For the 30cm pendulum it was 9.7ms^2 whereas for the 5cm one it was 3.24m/s^2 which is just ridiculous. Is it possible for the accuracy to increase with increasing lengths? I looked at other...