Every number in this unit so far arrived already measured. A real investigation is not like that: it hands you a strip of paper with dots on it, or a spreadsheet of positions, and nothing else. The physics is no longer in the equations — it is in knowing which quantity to calculate, which graph to draw, and how much of your answer you are entitled to believe. This topic is the analysing-and-communicating half of a scientific investigation, applied to the kinematics you already know.
Getting the data
| Method | How it records position | Time between readings | Watch out for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ticker tape | A vibrating needle prints a dot on a paper tape towed behind the cart | Set by the mains frequency — a timer prints a dot every | The tape dragging through the timer slightly slows the cart |
| Motion sensor | Ultrasound pulses reflect off the cart and the return time gives the distance | Whatever sampling rate you choose, often 20–50 readings per second | It reports the nearest object, so a stray hand ruins the run |
| Video analysis | You step through the frames and mark the object against a metre stick placed in shot | The frame rate, commonly 30 or 60 frames per second | The camera must be square to the motion, or the distances are distorted |
Whichever method you use, the raw result is the same pair of columns: a time and a position. Counting off every twelfth dot on a tape makes each interval long, which is short enough to follow the motion and long enough that the gaps can be measured with a ruler. The interval velocity is then just the average velocity across one interval, , and calculating one for every interval turns a position table into a velocity table.
| (s) | Position (m) | (m) | Interval velocity (m/s) | Midpoint time (s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.000 | 0.000 | — | — | — |
| 0.200 | 0.030 | 0.030 | 0.150 | 0.100 |
| 0.400 | 0.120 | 0.090 | 0.450 | 0.300 |
| 0.600 | 0.270 | 0.150 | 0.750 | 0.500 |
| 0.800 | 0.480 | 0.210 | 1.050 | 0.700 |
| 1.000 | 0.750 | 0.270 | 1.350 | 0.900 |
Plotting, and the line of best fit
- Independent variable on the horizontal axis. You chose the times, so time goes across; the measured quantity goes up.
- Label both axes with the quantity and its unit, because the units on the axes are what give the slope its units later.
- Choose a scale that uses most of the paper. A graph squeezed into one corner magnifies every reading error when you take the slope.
- Plot the points, then draw one straight line through them with a ruler — a line of best fit, not a dot-to-dot. Aim for roughly as many points above the line as below, and as close to each as you can manage.
- Do not force the line through the origin unless the data genuinely go there. A non-zero intercept is a result, not a mistake to be tidied away.
- Circle any point that sits far off the line and say so in the report rather than quietly deleting it.
The slope, and what its units tell you
Linearizing a curved graph
The position-time graph for that cart is a curve, and a curve has no single slope. Rather than give up, change what you plot. For an object released from rest, loses its first term and becomes . Compare that with the equation of a straight line through the origin, : if you put up the vertical axis and along the horizontal one, the points fall on a straight line whose slope is . Linearizing is this trick in general — square, invert or otherwise transform one axis until the relationship becomes a line, because a line is the only shape whose slope you can read reliably by hand.
Random error and systematic error
- Scatters readings both above and below the true value
- Comes from reaction time, judging a ruler mark, a wobbling cart
- Shows up as points scattered either side of the line of best fit
- Reduced by repeating the measurement and averaging
- Never removed completely — it sets the precision
- Pushes every reading the same way, by roughly the same amount
- Comes from a mis-set zero, a stretched tape, friction in the timer, air resistance
- Shows up as points that fit the line beautifully but give the wrong slope or intercept
- Repeating and averaging does not help at all
- Removed only by finding the cause and fixing or correcting for it
This is why a result can be very precise and completely wrong. Five runs that agree with each other to within but sit below the accepted value are telling you about a systematic problem, not a random one. Finish the report by comparing your value with the accepted one using quoting your result to the number of significant figures your instruments actually justified, and naming the most likely source of the discrepancy along with something specific you would change in the next run.