stevedice@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Oct 20:49
nextcollapse
Back in my early years of uni, we had one of those tests in which every question depends on the previous answer and we had to round every answer to two significant figures. For some stupid reason, a friend and I decided to also use the rounded figure when inputting the values into the next question instead of working algebraically. By the last question, we were off by like 5.
TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 08 Oct 21:10
nextcollapse
My lab partner and I *
hypnicjerk@lemmy.world
on 08 Oct 21:13
nextcollapse
âme discussing with my lab partnerâ vs âi discussing with my lab partnerâ
Ceedoestrees@lemmy.world
on 08 Oct 22:54
nextcollapse
As long as your errors are randomly distributed you should keep making observations until you get an error of -347% in the other direction, thus cancelling out your previous error and allowing you to model your entire existence with Riemann curves
The main difference between Science and fucking around is that Science has you write things down. So long as you record everything you did, even if it ended up with wildly unexpected results, itâs valid.
threaded - newest
No measurement is perfect. If your statistics are well executed, the measurement is a valid contribution to human knowledge.
Also every measurement is of great impact as long as nobody else can measure more precisely. So just wait đ
Hey, if we play this right, we can get a constant named after us!
Constant-ly gets it wrong. I can already see it đ€©
Knowing what not to do is just as important right?
One more method checked off the list!
âClearly the model is wrongâ
Back in my early years of uni, we had one of those tests in which every question depends on the previous answer and we had to round every answer to two significant figures. For some stupid reason, a friend and I decided to also use the rounded figure when inputting the values into the next question instead of working algebraically. By the last question, we were off by like 5.
My lab partner and I *
âme discussing with my lab partnerâ vs âi discussing with my lab partnerâ
Theyâre physickers not languagers.
.
As long as your errors are randomly distributed you should keep making observations until you get an error of -347% in the other direction, thus cancelling out your previous error and allowing you to model your entire existence with Riemann curves
One time my lab partner kept the waste and threw out the product
Thatâs just a matter of perspective
I donât think my lab supervisor is gonna see it that way XD
The main difference between Science and fucking around is that Science has you write things down. So long as you record everything you did, even if it ended up with wildly unexpected results, itâs valid.