PHY 243 ESSAY #2 Name: ____________________

DUE: 2PM Sunday, June 28, 2020

Analysis of Remote Activity #4 – Work-KE Theorem
Essay Format Requirements:
 Essay must be written in size 11 “Times New Roman” font.
 It should be double-spaced with 1 inch left and right margins.
 It must meet the 500-word minimum. No headings – use essay format.
 Submit your essay as a word document through the posted “Turn-it-In” assignment on
Blackboard. This rubric must be included as the first page.

Essay Content & Grading Requirements TOTAL YOUR

Please note these are only general requirements. Be creative with SCORE
the history and importance of the phenomena illustrated. POINTS
1. Clearly describe the goals of the experiment. 5
2. Discuss the concepts behind the experiment. 15
3. Research the history & importance of the phenomena
20
illustrated, or physical quantity measured.
4. Organization & Structure
20
– Include this rubric as the first page of your essay.
5. Clarity of Expression 20
6. References 10
7. Punctuality 10
Total for Essay 100
Total for Lab Report 100
Total Overall Points 200
Overall Experiment Grade - Essay & Lab 200/2 = 100

 IF ESSAY IS NOT ACCEPTED: PLEASE REVISE AND INCLUDE THE ORIGINAL

ESSAY AND SCORING RUBRIC WITH THE REVISION. REVISION DUE: _______
 Please utilize the CSU Writing Center. ON-LINE TUTORING APPOINTMENTS ARE
AVAILABLE. Further information can be found on their website:
http://www.csuohio.edu/academic/writingcenter/
The examination's goal is to explore the transformation of work into dynamic vitality, especially the
exploration performed by the intensity of gravity. The Work-motor vitality hypothesis likens the all-out power
(gravity, force, air opposition, and so on.) that works on a molecule or element with the active vitality that that
element or molecule retains or needs.
 Source: http://www.umsl.edu/~physics/lab/mechanicslab/11-Lab6.html.
Jewett Jr, J. W. (2008). Energy and the confused student I: Work. The Physics Teacher, 46(1), 38-43.

The research principle and theorem of kinetic energy, also known as law of research-energy, states that
the work performed by the sum of all the forces operating on a particle is proportional to the increase in the
kinetic energy of the particle.
W=▲KE
By this law, once an object slows down, the final kinetic energy of the object is less than its initial kinetic
energy, the gap in kinetic energy is negative and thus the net work carried out on it is therefore negative. This is
positive if the object speeds up the net work done on it. We must include all the forces acting on the object whilst
calculating the net work. If we leave out any force acting on the object, or if we include any force not acting on
the object, we are going to get a wrong result. The aim of the theorem of work-kinetic energy and the more
generalizations to which the theorem leads is that it allows any sort of equations simpler to do than they should
have been by trying to solve the second law of Newton.
Source: Hilborn, R. C. (2019). Galilean Transformations of Kinetic Energy, Work, and Potential Energy.
The Physics Teacher, 57(1), 40-43.
The term work was first used by the French mathematician Gaspard Gustave Coriolis in the year 1826 according
to Jammer. He implemented research as the 'weight raised from a height' focused on utilizing early steam engines
to raise the water buckets out of the flooded mines. According to French engineer and historian Rene Dugas, we
owe it to engineer Solomon of Caux that we owe the term work in the specific sense that is used in mathematics
and physics today.
Source: Swartz, C. (2004). Why use the work-energy theorem?. American journal of physics, 72(9),
1145-1145.
Through this experiment we will be able to determine the overall variance between the experiments and
the shift in the kinetic energy together with the experimental instability by creating several observations at various
locations as the body accelerates and with specific forces working on the experimental sample. When we consider
that this gap is not zero in our experimental error estimation then we can consider the systematic errors. One
possible cause of systemic error is a frictional force operating on the target of experiment. If greater forces are
added on the target, so a frictional force would be of diminishing importance, thereby increasing the alignment
with the principle of greater force imposed to the target.
Source: Moffat, R. J. (1982). Contributions to the theory of sample uncertainty analysis.
If compliance with principle does not change with the larger force of intervention on target instead find a
cause of systemic error rather than the friction. For this experiment the mistake will also arise if the massless
strings are included. Some of the new error propagation formulae are more readily available and understood when
defined in terms of fractional uncertainty (or percentage uncertainty) rather than total uncertainty. We have to
make sure that all of them are at ease so that we can appreciate the difference. For example, if we calculate a
duration of 2.00 ± 0.12 m, the ambiguity of this measurement is 0.12 m (or 12 cm), but we can also conclude that
the duration is 6 percent uncertain as 0.12 m divided by 2.00 m is 0.06.4. Most importantly, starting from this
trial, it would be possible to reproduce errors using the new techniques, if appropriate. There are three simple
forms such modern methods may not be implemented.

Where associated errors are found in the estimation. This is always necessary to update the calculation,
though not always, such that the mistakes are not reversed. When we can't, we 're going to have to revert to the
lowest type.
 Where the equation requires a statistical operation other than elevating / subtracting / adding / dividing /
multiplying force, e.g. log or exp or sin. For examples, if we calculate a 30 ° ± 2 ° angle, what is the sine
uncertainty? Once again, we should fall back on the worst-case method: (within 32 ° -sin 28 °)/2.
Where our calculation involves an integral number or the derivative of some data points.

Source: Yao, X. C., Wang, T. X., Chen, H. Z., Gao, W. B., Fowler, A. G., Raussendorf, R., ... & Chen, Y. A.
(2012). Experimental demonstration of error correction. Nature, 482(7386), 489
Reiner, M., & Burko, L. M. (2003). On the limitations of experiments in physics and the consequences for physics
education. Science & Education, 12(4), 365-385.

References:
www.umsl.edu/~physics/lab/mechanicslab/11-Lab6.html.
Jewett Jr, J. W. (2008). Energy and the confused student I: Work. The Physics Teacher, 46(1), 38-43.
Hilborn, R. C. (2019). Galilean Transformations of Kinetic Energy, Work, and Potential Energy. The Physics
Teacher, 57(1), 40-43.
Swartz, C. (2004). Why use the work-energy theorem?. American journal of physics, 72(9), 1145-1145.
Moffat, R. J. (1982). Contributions to the theory of sample uncertainty analysis.
Yao, X. C., Wang, T. X., Chen, H. Z., Gao, W. B., Fowler, A. G., Raussendorf, R., ... & Chen, Y. A. (2012).
Experimental demonstration of error correction. Nature, 482(7386), 489
Reiner, M., & Burko, L. M. (2003). On the limitations of experiments in physics and the consequences for physics
education. Science & Education, 12(4), 365-385.