1

T ERM PAPER
OF
PHYSICS-112

TOPIC:- When you check air pressure in a

tyre, a little air always escapes; the process
of making the measurement changes the
quantity being measured. Think of other
examples of measurements that change or
disturb the quantity being measured.

SUBMITTED BY
SUBMITTED TO
NAME- BITTU KUMAR LECT. SARITA
DEVI SHARMA

SECTION-E2801
(DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS)

ROLL NO. – 46
 2

REGISTRATION NO. -10808479

 3

As usual a la
 4

CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
2. EXPERIMENT OF CAPILLARY TUBE

3. MEASURING THE RESISTANCE

3.1 EXPERIMENT 1
3.2 EXPERIMENT 2
3.3 EVALUATION
3.4 ANALYSIS

4. SPECIFC HEAT OF ANY MATERIAL

4.1 SPECIFIC HEAT MEASUREMENT
PROCESS
4.2 SETUP AND PROCEDURE

5. MEASURE THE SPEED OF LIGHT

USING FACOULTS METHOD
5.1 RESULTS

6. REFERENCE
 5

1.INTRODUCTION
There is many experiment in which measurement change or disturbe the
quantity being measured.

Systematic errors are biases in measurement which lead to the situation where
the mean of many separate measurements differs significantly from the actual
value of the measured attribute. All measurements are prone to systematic
errors, often of several different types. Sources of systematic error (zero error)
may be imperfect calibration of measurement instruments, changes in the
environment which interfere with the measurement process and sometimes
imperfect methods of observation can be either zero error or percentage error

There is various experiment in which measurement instrument changes the

quantity being measured

As we discussed below

1. Capillary tube

2. Experiment to find low resistance

3. Experiment to find the specific heat of the material

4. Experiment to find speed of light using facoults method

 6

2. EXPERIMENT OF CAPPILARY TUBE

When one end of the tube of small radius is dipped into a liquid, the liquid rises
or is depressed in the tube. If the contact angle is less than 90 degree. If it is
greater than 90, it is depressed

Suppose a tube of radius r is dipped into a liquid of surface tension S and the
density ρ. Let the angle of contact between the solid and the liquid be θ. If the
radius of the tube is small, the surface in the tube is nearly spherical.

Consider the equilibrium of the part of the liquid raised in the tube. In the figure
this liquid is contained in the volume ABEF. Forces on this part of the liquid
area

a). F1, by the surface of the tube pn the surface ABCD of the liquid

b). F2 , due to the pressure of the air above the surface ABCD

c). F3, due to pressure of the liquid below EF

d). the weight W of the liquid ABEF

ABCD is the surface of the liquid inside the capillary tube. It meets the wall of
the tube along a circle of the radius r. the angle made by the liquid surface with
the surface of the tube is equal to the contact angle θ.

Consider a small part dl of the periphery 2πr along which the surface of the
liquid and the tube meet. The liquid surface across this pulls the tube surfaces
by the force Sdl tangentially along the liquid surfaces. From newton’s thirds
law, the surfaces across this small parts pull the liquid surfaces by an angle
force Sdl I the opposite direction. The vertical component of this force is Sdl
cosθ. The total forces exerted on the liquid surfaces by the value tube surfaces
across the contact circle is

F1 =

= Scosθ

= 2πrS cosθ …………………………..(1)

The horizontal component Sdl sinθ adds to zero when summed over thr entire
the pheriphery
 7

The force F2 due to the pressure of the air outside the surfaces ABCD is P.
where P is the atomospheric pressure

The force acts vertically downward. The pressure at EF is equal to the

atomospheric pressure P. this because EF is in the horizontal plane as the free
outside the tube and pressure thee is P. the force due to liquid below EF is ,
therefore P in the vertical upward direction

Thus F2 and F 3 are cancel to each other and the force F1 =2πr Scosθ balance
the weight W in the equilibrium. If the height raised in the tube is h and if we
neglect the weight of the liquid contained in the meniscus , the volume of the
liquid is . the weight of this part is then

W=

= 2πrS cosθ

h= 2 S cosθ/rρg

we see that the height raised is inversely proportional to the radius of the
capillary tube. If the contact angle is θ is greater than 90 , the term cosθ is
negative and hence h negative . the expression gives the depression of the liquid
in the tube .

the correction due to the weight of the liquid contained in the meniscus can be
easily made if the angle of contact angle is 0. This the case of water rising in a
glass capillary. The meniscus is then hemispherical
 8

the volume of the shaded part is

= 1/3

The weight of the liquid contained in the mabiscus is 1/3 ρg equation (2)
then replaced

Or h = 2S/rρg -r/3

Tube of insufficient length

If tube is the length less than h, the liquid doesn’t overflow . the angle made by
the liquid surface with the tube changes in such a way that the force 2πrS cosθ
equal the weight of the liquid raised

3.MEASURING THE RESISTANCE

Some variables that will be relevant to this investigation are:

• Length
• Thickness
• Temperature
• Voltage
• Resistance
• Material

Of these the variables will be input and output voltages in experiment one, and
length and resistance in experiment two. The other variables (temperature,
material and voltage) will have to be kept constant in both experiments to make
sure that only length, thickness and resistance are investigated. In experiment 1
the same bit of wire and the same thickness need to be kept constant. In
experiment 2, the length will need to be kept constant to make sure only the
variables indicated are investigated to ensure a fair test.

Metals conduct electricity because the atoms in them do not hold on to their
electrons very well, and so creating free electrons, carrying a negative charge to
jump along the line of atoms in a wire. Resistance is caused when these
electrons flowing towards the positive terminal have to ‘jumps’ atoms. So if we
double the length of a wire, the number of atoms in the wire doubles, so the
 9

number of jumps double, so twice the amount of energy is required: There are
twice as many jumps if the wire is twice as long.

The thinner the wire is the less channels of electrons in the wire for current to
flow, so the energy is not spread out as much, so the resistance will be higher:
We see that if the area of the wire doubles, so does the number of possible
routes for the current to flow down, therefore the energy is twice as spread out,
so resistance might halve,

i.e. Resistance= 1/Area.

This can be explained using the formula

R = V/I

where there is 2X the current, and the voltage is the same, therefore R will
halve. I did some research and in a book called ‘Ordinary Level Physics’ By A.
F. Abbott, it says ‘that doubling the area will therefore halve the resistance’- in
other words the resistance of a wire is inversely proportional to its area, or R ?
1/A , but we are measuring diameter, so if the area is: ?r2 = ?(d?2) 2 A= ?d2 ? 4
Where A is area and d is diameter.

3.1 Experiment One - First a length of wire over a metre

long is sellotaped to a metre rule. The positive crocodile clip is attached at 0cm.
And the negative is moved up and down the wire, stopping at 20, 40, 60, 80 and
100cm. Each time reading the ammeter and voltmeter to work out resistance R
= V/I. This is using 30 SWG wire. Other variables, voltage, thickness, and
temperature will be kept constant, although the temperature will rise once
current is passing through it, which will cause the atoms in the wire to vibrate,
and so obstruct the flow of electrons, so the resistance will increase, creating an
error. In both experiments constantan wire is used because it does not heat up as
much as copper, so the resistance is not effected as much.

3.2 Experiment Two - The circuit isset up is the same,

as is the method apart from the length is constant at 50cm, and the thickness is
changed between 28, 30, 32, 34, 36, 38 and 40 swg. For both experiments the
voltage will be kept the same at 2V dc from a power pack. Both experiments
will be done twice with different ammeters in case of any damaged or old
equipment to gain more accurate results.
 10

Results
Experiment 1
Length Average resistance
V1 (volts) V2 (volts) A1 (amps) A2 (amps)
(cm) (Ohms)
100 1.00 1.00 0.20 0.20 5.00
80 1.00 1.00 0.30 0.28 4.00
60 0.90 0.90 0.40 0.30 2.80
40 0.90 0.85 0.50 0.40 1.94
20 0.70 0.80 0.80 0.75 0.94
Experiment 2
Thickness Area A2
V1 (volts) V2 (volts) A1 (amps) Resistance
(mm) (mm2) (amps)
28 0.36 0.107 0.8 0.8 0.61 0.59
1.3 0.29 0.066 0.9 0.9 0.49 0.51
1.8 0.32 0.25 0.049 0.9 0.9 0.35
0.4 0.24 0.34 0.18 0.025 1.0 1.0
0.25 0.25 1.0 1.0 0.25 0.4 0.36
0.16 0.020 1.0 1.0 0.16 0.17 0.61
0.38 0.12 0.011 1.1 1.1 0.09 1.00
0.09 1.00 11.6 40 0.05 0.0020 1.2

3.3 Evaluation
Evaluation Experiment one: This experiment
was quite accurate, as when it is compared to the manufactures line which is on
the same graph, we can see that this line is at most only 0.4? different form the
manufactures line. This is a percentage difference of approximately 8%, using
the formula: Difference ? original X 100 This shows that the results were good,
as 8% is a very small margin of error. The error bars on the graph show that the
most inaccurate result was the 60cm result. This could be down to an error in
the measurement of the wire or a temperature rise. The two results for 100cm
are exactly the same, and it is near to the manufacture’s line, so this is the most
accurate point.

The other three readings have almost the same inaccuracy, an average of 10%,
which again, is fairly accurate. The inaccuracy could have been because of the
wire coming from a different manufacturer to the predicted results, as there is
some discrepancy between the amount of copper and nickel in different brand’s
 11

wire. The ammeters and voltmeters could have been damaged and reading
falsely on both the meters used.

Measuring the lengths of the wire is also a inaccuracy as the rulers used are not
exact, and it is difficult to get an accurate reading of length by eye, as the wire
might not be completely straight, it may be of different thicknesses throughout
the length. These would have contributed as well to the error. These results
would be difficult to improve on as they are reasonably accurate, and there were
no anomalous results. But if I were to do this experiment again, I would use
newer, more accurate ammeters and voltmeters, a more accurate method of
measurement, and take a much wider range of readings, and more readings so
that a more accurate average can be taken.

I would also investigate other factors, such as temperature, voltage and current,
and see how these effect the resistance. I would also do the experiments under
different conditions such as temperature and pressure to see if it makes any
difference to resistance. As these results had a range of only 5 readings, from 0-
100cm, and were only repeated twice, and that the results are not 100%,
accurate due to the errors discussed earlier, then I would say that these results
are not strong enough to base a firm conclusion on because there are so many
sources of error, which are explained earlier.

Experiment two - These results were not as accurate as

experiment one. I had predicted that the resistance should halve as area doubles,
which it does, however not to the predicted curve. When the resistance is
24ohms, the % inaccuracy is 6%, and when the resistance is 6 ohms, the
inaccuracy is 8%. These inaccuracies are fairly large. The error bars, however,
are too small to be drawn accurately on the graph. They are at most 3%
inaccurate, using the same formula as before. This suggests that the inaccuracies
were not experimental, but permanent errors due to problems with the
measuring equipment.

These results were this inaccurate as the tool used for measuring the diameter of
the wire were very inaccurate due to a zero error on the screw reading, i.e. the
mark given for zero mm was not the real mark, hence throwing all the results
off by the same amount. The ammeters and voltmeters could have been
damaged and reading falsely on both the meters used. Measuring the lengths of
the wire is also a inaccuracy as the rulers used are not exact, and it is difficult to
get an accurate reading of length by eye, as the wire might not be completely
straight, it may be of different thicknesses throughout the length. These would
have contributed as well to the error.
 12

There was one slightly anomalous result, at 0.25mm2. This could have been due
to a unique error in the measuring and or reading of the meters, or a temperature
change. These results could be done better. If I were to do this experiment
again, I would use newer, more accurate ammeters and voltmeters, a more
accurate method of measurement, and take a much wider range of readings, and
more readings so that a more accurate average can be taken. I would also
investigate other factors, such as temperature, voltage and current, and see how
these effect the resistance. I would also do the experiments under different
conditions such as temperature and pressure to see if it makes any difference to
resistance.

As these results had a range of only 7 readings, from 0.1mm2, and were only
repeated twice, and that the results are not 100% accurate, due to the errors
discussed earlier, then I would say that these results are not strong enough to
base a firm conclusion on because there are so many sources of error, which
have been explained earlier.

3.4 Analysis
The graph of experiment 1 is a straight line through the origin, which means R
is directly proportional to L. This means that if the length is 40cm, and
resistance is 2?, then if length is doubled to 80cm, resistance also doubles to 4.

This is because of the scientific idea, stated in the planning that if you double
length, you double the number of atoms in it, so doubling the number of
electron ‘jumps’, which causes resistance: The results support my predictions
well, the results turned out the way I had expected, they match the predicted line
well. I had predicted a straight line through the origin, which means R is
directly proportional to L.

The graph of experiment 2 is an inversely proportional curve. This is because R

is directly proportional 1/A, this means when A doubles, R halves. for example
when the Area is 0.025mm2 the resistance is 4.8. When A doubles to 0.05, R
halves to 2.4?. When A doubles again, R halves again to 1.2. This is because, as
stated earlier: We see that if the area of the wire doubles, so does the number of
possible routes for the current to flow down, therefore the energy is twice as
spread out, so resistance might halve, i.e. Resistance is directly proportional
1/Area.

4. SPECIFIC HEAT OF ANY MATERIAL

 13

The heat capacity C of a substance is defined as the amount of heat needed to

raise its temperature by one Celsius degree. From that it is seen when Q units of
heat is added to the system, then the change temperature ΔT is related to Q as

C= Q/ ΔT …………..1
The heat capacity is proportional to the mass (m) of the heated substance.

C = c m (2)

where c is the specific heat which is the heat capacity per unit mass of the
substance.

From equations (1) and (2), the heat exchanged between an object and its
surrounding can be expressed using the resultant change in temperature

Q = mcΔT (3)

The quantity of heat absorbed ΔQ depends on the conditions prevailing as the

temperature rises, and a differentiation is made in particular between heat
capacity CV at constant volume V and heat capacity Cp at constant pressure p.
Cp is always greater than CV. In the case of solids, the change in volume is so
small that we can write

Cp ≈. CV

In this experiment, the specific heat of a metal can be calculated using a very
simple and well known method where small balls of metal with known mass
(ms) is heated to a known temperature Ts (temperature of water vapor), which is
mixed with water of mass mw and temperature Tw. After equilibrium the
temperature of the water mixed with the metal T is measured. As the heat
energy is conserved then the amount of heat lost by the metal will be gained by
water. As the metal is good heat conductor, the exchange of heat between water
and hot balls is rapid so loss of heat by radiation is neglected

The heat absorbed by the water container, calorimeter, is neglected because its
mass is small when compared with that of water.

4.1 Specific heat measurement

apparatus
 14

APPARATUS
calorimeter with cover, iron small balls, lab balance, thermometer, steam
chamber, heating tool, beaker and stand with clamps.

4.2 SETUP AND PROCEDURE

1. Weigh the calorimeter with its cover.

2. Fill the calorimeter to about its half with tap water and weigh it again.
3. Read off the temperature of the water in the calorimeter.
4. Enclose the solid balls in a steam chamber (container full of running boiling
water steam).

5. Leave the balls in for a time long enough for the balls to gain the same
temperature as the steam.
6. Transfer the balls to the calorimeter as fast as possible. Drop the balls in
water
gently to avoid water splashing
7. Weigh the calorimeter with the water and balls in to determine the weight of
the
metal balls
8. Read off the temperature in the calorimeter every minute after the balls has
been
put in, stirring continuously, until the temperature reaches its highest value and
falls again by 5 C.
9. Plot the results over time on a graph. The mixture temperature can be
determined by extrapolation from the graph

Mass of calorimeter and thermometer = ………………………

Mass of calorimeter and thermometer + water = ………………………
Mass of water mw = ………………………
Initial temperature of water Tw = ………………………
Mass of calorimeter and thermometer + water+ solid balls =
………………………
Mass of solid balls ms = ………………………
Initial temperature of solid balls Ts = ………… ..
The highest temperature of mixture T = …………
Heat lost by solid Ql= mscs(Ts-T)
 15

Heat gained by water Qg= mwcw(T-Tw)

mscs(Ts-T) = mwcw(T-Tw)
cs= mwcw(T-Tw)/ ms (Ts-T)

10. Calculate the total possible error in the determined value of cs

5. SPEED OF LIGHT BY FOUCAULT

METHOD
The basics principle of facault’s methods can be understood with the help of fig.
light from a source S is party transmitted by a glass plate G and is incident on a
convex lens L. the distance of the lens from S is adjusted that the beam
transmitted through the lens is convergent. This beam is intercepted by a plane
mirror M1, which can be roteted about an axies perpendicular to the plane of the
fig. The plane mirror reflect the light which converge on a concave mirror M2,
the distance between two mirror is equal to the radius of curvature of the
concave mirror. The concave mirror reflect the light beam back to the plane
mirror . the central ray is always incident on the concave mirror perpendicularly
so that it retraces the path. If the plane mirror does not rotate, the ray retrace
path upto the glass plate G. a part of the beam is reflected by the class plate and
forms and image I of the sources. Now , suppose the plane mirror M1 rotate by
an angle del θ by the time light goes from M1 to M2 and comes back to it. The
light reflected by M1 and then make an angle 2 del θ with direction of the ray
reflected eariliar. Because of this deviation , the returning ray forms an image I’
of the source which is slightly shifted from the position I
 16

Suppose

R= radius of the concave mirror

W= the angular speed plane mirror

s= the shift II’

b= the distance from M1 to L

a= the distance from L to S

when mirror M1 is in the position M1 , the rays reflected by its lens seem to
come from a point O which is the image of the point C in M1. When it has
rotated by the angle del θ, the rays reflected by it to the lens seem to come from
a point O’. which is the image of C in the new position M’1 of the mirror. The
distance BO=BC=R it is clear from the physics
 17

that

OO’=R.(2 del θ)

Now the ray reflected by the position M1 of the mirror retraces the path and
would converse at the source S itself. The glass plate partly reflect the beam to
converse it at I . thus I is the image of S in the plate G acting as plane mirror .
simalary the ray is eflected by the position M’1 of the mirror are conversed by
the lens at a point S’. b

SS’=II’=s

Thus the lens L forms an image of O at S and of O’ at S’. if we place an object

of size OO’ at O, its image will have the size SS’ at thus

SS’/OO’ =magnification produced by the lens

=image distance/object distance

=a/ R+b

s/2Rdelθ = a/R+b

if the speed of light is c it takes time del t = 2R/c to go from M1 to M2 and to

come back. As the angular speed of M1 is w , the angle rotated by it in the time
del t is

del θ= w del t= 2wR/c

c=4R2wa/s(R+a)

all the quantities in the right side may be measured in the experiment and hence
the speed of the light may be calculated . facaoult’s obtained the value 2.98*108
m/s from his measurement

the space required in this experiment is quite small and hence it may be
performed inside the laboratory another advantage of this method is tha t one
can put the tube of a transparent material between the two mirror. The speed
calculated by the material is equal to the speed of light of the material. It can be
experimently verified that the light travels at slower rate in a medium as
compared to its speed in the vaccum . this prediction to the newton’s
corpuscular theory.
 18

5.1 RESULTS
Although uncertainties of around 10% of the value exist from the experiment, it
would be hard using the existing methods to further reduce the values. It would
require extremely precise measurements to reach an uncertainty of 1%. For
example, it would require taking distance measurements with an uncertainty of
0.1 mm and displacement measurements on the frosted screen of around 25 μm.
Considering the average uncertainty of measurements using the microscope
measurement device was approximately 200 μm from random uncertainty,
reaching around 25 μm becomes a difficult task. Such assumptions also assume
that no other sources of error or experimental setup issues interfere with the
experiment itself. Eventually a newer method would have to be used in order to
measure c more precisely past three significant figures. One of the ways such an
experiment could be improved was if the microscope measurements were
replaced by a photo detector that was used to measure the intensity of the light
as a function of the distance across the glass plate and determine the position of
the maximum intensity. The photo detector would have to be able to measure
intensity over small sections of the glass plate, on the order of a few microns, in
order to decrease the uncertainty in the resulting value for the speed of light.

6. REFERENCES:-
1. CONCEPT OF PHYSICS- H.C VERMA

2. FUNDAS OF PHYSICS- TRUE MAN

PUBLICATION

3. IIT PHYSICS ARIHANT

PUBLICATION

4. WWW.GOOGLE.COM