Re: [Phys-l] picket fence free fall vs. ticker tape timer

[Pat Viele <ptv1@cornell.edu>]

In the same issue of TPT is this article: 
> Improving Precision and Accuracy in the g Lab
> Parker Moreland, 13 Strawberry Hill Road, Danbury, CT 06811; 
> pmoreland@compuserve.com
which does mention Vernier equipment.

Pat



John Gastineau wrote:
> On Sep 16, 2007, at 1:54 PM, Rauber, Joel wrote:
>   
> > The Physics Teacher, Vol. 35, April 1997.
> >
> > Vernier changed their coding of the data taking as a result of this
> > article, as I understand it.
> > ________________________
> > Joel Rauber
> > Department of Physics - SDSU
> >     
>
> While the algorithm used for photogate motion timing (aka picket  
> fence timing) used by various Vernier programs has been changed over  
> the years to make more raw data available, our software never made  
> the gross error described in the excellent paper above (which does  
> not mention Vernier).
>
> The paper describes data from a picket fence free-fall experiment as  
> analyzed by a commercial software package from another interface  
> company, and how the software's developers make an error that creates  
> poor results from good raw data.
>
> The full title is "Dangers of Automated Data Analysis" by William J.  
> Leonard. TPT volume 35, April 1997, page 220-222. It's well worth  
> reading, and is within reach of better introductory physics students.
>
> --
> John Gastineau
> Staff Scientist and Partner
> Vernier Software & Technology
> jgastineau@vernier.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
>   


--
Patricia T. Viele, Physics & Astronomy Librarian
Edna McConnell Clark Physical Sciences Library
Clark Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853-2501
Voice:  607-255-0067
FAX:    607-255-5288
email:  ptv1@cornell.edu