25.4k views
0 votes
( I need help finding the checkpoint !) Table B: Time Recorded

Height at Start
0.61 m
¼ Checkpoint
1.524 m
½ Checkpoint
3.048 m
% Checkpoint
m
Finish Line
-
m
at Checkpoints for Lower Racetrack
Time of
Time of
Trial #1
Trial #2
(s)
(s)
2.15
2.05
3.25
4.23
5.01
3.07
3.98
4.81
Time of
Trial #3
(s)
2.02
3.17
4.12
4.93
Average
Time
(s)
2.07
3.16
4.11
4.92
0

( I need help finding the checkpoint !) Table B: Time Recorded Height at Start 0.61 m-example-1
User Lalith B
by
8.3k points

1 Answer

4 votes

Final answer:

The new stopwatch has an uncertainty which is a substantial fraction of the difference in sprint times and may not be precise enough for accurately determining winners in closely matched races.

Step-by-step explanation:

To determine the usefulness of the new stopwatch with an uncertainty of ±0.05 s in timing the sprint team, we can consider the recorded times of the runners which are between 11.49 s and 15.01 s. The difference between the first and second place sprinters is 0.03 s, which is within the uncertainty range of the stopwatch. This suggests that the new stopwatch might not be precise enough to distinguish such small differences in time accurately. Moreover, for accurate timing in competitive sports, it's crucial that the measurement tool's uncertainty is significantly smaller than the time differences being measured. In this case, the stopwatch's uncertainty is a substantial fraction of the difference in sprint times, potentially leading to ambiguity in the results.

During a track meet, closeness of sprinter finish times and the impact of the stopwatch's uncertainty must be considered when declaring a winner. The stopwatch's uncertainty plays a pivotal role and could make the difference between a first-place finish and second place unclear.

User Flamur Beqiraj
by
7.4k points