How was physics paper 33

[Knight]

and by this method i got a negative gradient

you used the same apparatus as mine so i also got a negative gradient

 

[Casablanca]

Now I'm genuinely confused about the gradient. ._.

 

[Knight]

Now I'm genuinely confused about the gradient. ._.

same situation here

 

[hussamh10]

i also got a -ve gradient...........and it should be negative.

it is negative confirmed from teacher and lab assistant

 

[Casablanca]

it is negative confirmed from teacher and lab assistant

One person says it's 100% confirmed as positive by a teacher, and another person says it's 100% confirmed as negative by a teacher.

You can't BOTH be right.

 

[Hertz]

OK **** GRADIENT !!!!!! Whaat was the ans for limitation n all...and method of improving it????? thats more important

 

[hussamh10]

The graph didnot have a negative gradient for the love of GOD.

it was negative beacause we had to take 1/m value on x axis and for smaller mass it had bi value so gradient was negative if we take only m than it is pasitive

 

[Casablanca]

OK **** GRADIENT !!!!!! Whaat was the ans for limitation n all...and method of improving it????? thats more important

- 2 readings insufficient to determine proportionality.
- Heat loss.
- Possible inaccurate temperature reading.
- Possible inaccurate diameter reading. (Wasn't sure about this one, but wrote it anyway since I didn't know what else to write.)

- Take 6 readings, plot a graph, determine proportionality according to graph.
- Perform in partial vacuum.
- Use thermocouple or electronic thermometer.
- (Had no idea what to write, so I wrote some weird-ass bullshit that I don't even remember. Hopefully it's correct.)

 

[hussamh10]

no! i got a negative gradient.. no way in hell could I get a positive gradient.. I donno wtf they did to their values?!

i also got negative and still cannot workout hot it could be positive .....

 

[Hertz]

i wrote like

- 2 readings insufficient to determine proportionality.
- Heat loss.
- Possible inaccurate temperature reading.
- Possible inaccurate diameter reading. (Wasn't sure about this one, but wrote it anyway since I didn't know what else to write.)

- Take 6 readings, plot a graph, determine proportionality according to graph.
- Perform in partial vacuum.
- Use thermocouple or electronic thermometer.
- (Had no idea what to write, so I wrote some weird-ass bullshit that I don't even remember. Hopefully it's correct.)

i wrote like
2 readings not enogh
difficult to measure d as diameter of the cup's opening was bigger than the bottom diameter as cup was like conical type (dint know how to explane)
diff between temp change of cup n temp change of bowl is to less
some thing i forgot but was a valid point

take more reading n plot a graph
use a cylindrical cup
take a bigger container like a cooking pan
some thing i forgot but was a valid point

 

[Casablanca]

i wrote like

i wrote like
2 readings not enogh
difficult to measure d as diameter of the cup's opening was bigger than the bottom diameter as cup was like conical type (dint know how to explane)
diff between temp change of cup n temp change of bowl is to less
some thing i forgot but was a valid point

take more reading n plot a graph
use a cylindrical cup
take a bigger container like a cooking pan
some thing i forgot but was a valid point

Wasn't the cup already cylindrical? Mine was. :/

 

[mujtabashahnawaz]

I wrote:
1.2 readings not enough
2.No proper insulation
3.Thermometer not precise
4.Heat loss to surroundings due to fans

 

[Saad Sarfraz]

I measure initial h correctly with set squares

Then there was some sort of problem with ur springs!!

 

[mujtabashahnawaz]

Then there was some sort of problem with ur springs!!

May be ...

 

[aom]

lol we had ACs blasting in the room so my temp for the cup decreased by 5 degrees and for the bowl decreased by 7 degrees

some how like you 6 and 8

 

[aom]

- 2 readings insufficient to determine proportionality.
- Heat loss.
- Possible inaccurate temperature reading.
- Possible inaccurate diameter reading. (Wasn't sure about this one, but wrote it anyway since I didn't know what else to write.)

- Take 6 readings, plot a graph, determine proportionality according to graph.
- Perform in partial vacuum.
- Use thermocouple or electronic thermometer.
- (Had no idea what to write, so I wrote some weird-ass bullshit that I don't even remember. Hopefully it's correct.)

same as you but instead of no idea i wrote use a vernier caliper to find diameter.

 

[emeffy]

I got the graph negative but the gradient positive, how in the world is that even possible :/

this made my day

 

[Knight]

Then there was some sort of problem with ur springs!!

this will not be a problem as the springs used were same throughout the experiment......problems with the springs will only change the magnitude of the gradient, not the sign(+ve or -ve)

 

[thunderingthunder]

this will not be a problem as the springs used were same throughout the experiment......problems with the springs will only change the magnitude of the gradient, not the sign(+ve or -ve)

ttrruuee thattt

 

[Knight]

i wrote like

i wrote like
2 readings not enogh
difficult to measure d as diameter of the cup's opening was bigger than the bottom diameter as cup was like conical type (dint know how to explane)
diff between temp change of cup n temp change of bowl is to less
some thing i forgot but was a valid point

take more reading n plot a graph
use a cylindrical cup
take a bigger container like a cooking pan
some thing i forgot but was a valid point

my cup was cylindrical..........but this is not a valid point as the only thing concerned was the surface area of the cup in contact with the air, not the shape of the cup or bowl....