accuracy: precision:
- fineness of scale on measuring uncertainty
- from experimental values, how close together the experiment values are reliability: repeating it more times
- according to watters apparently its not that, if the results differ differently, it is no longer reliable (wouldnโt it be reliably inaccurate?)
- ???????
validity: my independent variable and dependent variable are the only things impacting the results
never throw away your outliers !!! unless you can explain why it is an outlier do minimum of 3, but irl do more than 3 !!!!!!
max-min/2 is sometimes bad especially if you do a lot of trials. standard deviation and standard error is typically used in uni
watters rant: galileo: gigachad in physics // not a pleasant person (~10mins)
WATTERS ADVICE ON PROJECTILE MOTION dont say vacuum as improvements: context of school investigation dont say macroscopic properties of ball; watters assume shiny [max-min]/2 for error
not an improvement (Needs to be a practical improvement):
- vacuum
horizontal circular
- stawa: going in circles investigation not validated but should be still taken seriously fr
improvement
- they ask for 1 improvement, that improvement is using air cannon
- biggest source of error is to do with variance in the cannon
- not consistent, and distance it shoots
- consistency of air cannon good
- say mass/weight of projectile instead of macroscopic properties of the ball