Re: what good is "percentage error"?

[Michael Thomason <thomason@spot.Colorado.EDU>]

Leigh,

John Taylor and I today put together a "traveling Wizard Show" (lecture 
demonstration talk) which he will present tomorrow at a high school near
the Breckenridge Ski Resort, Breckenridge, Colorado.

Of course, I mentioned your observations, below, to him.  He points out
that although his text initially uses error and uncertainty 
interchangeably, the meaning of the term "error" is gradually sharpened to
refer to true error, random error, and probable error.

Incidentally, a new second edition of "An Introduction to Error Analysis"
should be available any day now from the same publisher, University
Science Books.

Michael Thomason, Director of Physics Learning Laboratories
University of Colorado, Dept of Physics, Box 390, Boulder CO 80309-0390
MWF 303 -492-7117   TTh 303 492-8313   thomason@aeinstein.colorado.edu
http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/

On Mon, 12 May 1997, Leigh Palmer wrote:

> Another view is held by John R. Taylor in his excellent book
> "An Introduction to Error Analysis - the Study of Uncertainties
> in Physical Measurements" (University Science Books). Taylor
> uses the terms interchangeably and without distinction, a
> practice which I think unnecessary and prone to the sort of
> cognitive error that is implicit in the lab manual you cite.