Element Posted February 16, 2007 Posted February 16, 2007 Is the only difference between the two is; experimental error uses significant figures and percentage of error doesn't?
Darkblade48 Posted February 16, 2007 Posted February 16, 2007 I've always thought of experimental error as a more "general" term to errors. For example, if you forgot (I certainly hope you didn't though!) to add a specific reagent, or perhaps contaminated one of your reagents accidently, this could be considered experimental error. Surely, you can't call this percentage of error, as it'd be impossible to arrive at a calculable numerical answer.
swansont Posted February 16, 2007 Posted February 16, 2007 I've always thought of experimental error as a more "general" term to errors. For example, if you forgot (I certainly hope you didn't though!) to add a specific reagent, or perhaps contaminated one of your reagents accidently, this could be considered experimental error. Surely, you can't call this percentage of error, as it'd be impossible to arrive at a calculable numerical answer. No, I think the terminology is in terms of quantifying the precision, rather than acknowledging mistakes. Numerical values (absolute errors) and percentage values (relative errors) are useful in error propagation, i.e. finding the resultant error from two or more terms in an equation that have an error associated with them. Added quantities have additive absolute errors (in quadrature) while multiplied quantities have additive relative errors (again, in quadrature)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now