When we write Chemistry lab reports, the last section of the report is always sources of error. Errors always occurs in experiments, and we are required to write about the errors that might have affected the results of our experiment. The most common error taking into account is absolute error - the error of measurements. This is based on the instruments used, the more specific they are, the less absolute error there is. However, as we do calculations, the absolute errors add up and we also have to do significant digits.
Why do we calculate all the errors? So that we know our range of correctness. The knowledge issue presented here is that if there are so many errors, how can we trust our results? Human errors are not written as sources of errors, but humans make mistakes all the time, so what happens if a human error did affect the experimental results but is not taken into account because it is a human error?
Chemistry, to me, is quite an ambiguous/vague subject because I can never know exactly which factors have affected the results. I can only assume and make predictions. This is a knowledge issue that happens in our daily life too, not just Chemistry - when life is full of ambiguity, can we trust our predictions and assumptions even if we know that there are errors/issues affecting them?
No comments:
Post a Comment