Question

Well one is a sign 96 invitations using a stopwatch them matters time to tens of the 2nd it takes low of 5.3 seconds designer full name going by the accuracy of the stopwatch. Which is most accurate determined for the number of minutes alone needs to sign all 96 imitations?

Answer 1

Considering a stopwatch with an uncertainty of ±0.05 seconds, we can't conclusively say that a sprinter's time improved from 12.04 to 11.96 seconds, as the difference is within the margin of error. The stopwatch would be useful for general timing but less reliable for very close races, where precision is paramount.

Step-by-step explanation:

The question concerns the measurement of time intervals during athletic events and the accuracy of the measurement tool, in this case, a stopwatch with an uncertainty of ±0.05 seconds. When comparing two sprint times of 12.04 seconds and 11.96 seconds recorded on different occasions, the difference in time is 0.08 seconds. While this suggests that the sprinter's time improved, the uncertainty in the stopwatch's readings must be considered.

Both times fall within the range of uncertainty indicated by the stopwatch's accuracy (12.04 ± 0.05 s and 11.96 ± 0.05 s), meaning they could overlap. Thus, we cannot conclusively state that this week's time was faster because the difference between the two times is within the margin of error for the stopwatch.

For running a 100 meter sprint in times ranging from 11.49 to 15.01 seconds, the use of such a stopwatch would still be helpful. However, in very close races, such as those decided by hundredths of a second, the uncertainty could mean the difference between first and second place. This aligns with the concept that measurement accuracy is critical in competitive sports timing.