Changing The Type Of Rocks Was The Inaccurate Information

Since the experiment procedure did not specify how much activated carbon should be added, too much activated carbon was added. This can lead to systemic errors because there was so much activated carbon on the top of funnel that won’t even wash off, which might had came back as contaminates

Calculation: Initial Mass(g)－Final Mass (g)=Change in Mass (g) Trial 1 74.5-62.0=12.5(g) Trial 2 272.7－271.5=1.2（g） Percent Error: 272.7-271.5 x 100 272.7 ＝0.440% Percent Change: 74.5-62.0 x 100 74.5 (Trial 1) =16.778% 272.7-271.5 x 100 272.7 (Trial 2) ＝0.440%

Rocks are intriguing to many individuals all over the world. Being made up of one or even many minerals, rocks draw an overwhelming amount of attention to themselves. When a probe brought back samples of rock from Planet X the task of identifying the rock was assigned. With no prior knowledge of the type of rock presented one will need figure out the identity of the rock based only on its density and physical properties. With an experimental process, one will begin to compare and uncover the identity of the rock samples brought back.

This cave is located 1000 feet underground and contains many of the largest natural gypsum crystals in the world (2). These pillars of selenite gypsum measure up to 50 feet long and 4 feet in diameter (1). These crystals were able to form in such huge quantities because the area was submerged in water that was rich in minerals as well as having a high stable temperature of 136 degrees Fahrenheit (2). The water had an abundant amount of anhydrite and, because of this environment, it dissolved into gypsum and formed these massive crystals (2). The water has since drained out of the caves and the air in the caves normally stays between 45 and 50 degrees Celsius and the humidity levels range from 90 to 100 percent (3).

Three trials were done. All three trials were done the same way. In trial one, the weigh boat was first zeroed on the scale. Five grams of the white unknown mixture was measured on to the weigh boat.

In the lab “All That Glitters” the objective that was focused on during the lab was calculating the density, volume and mass of various substances. The method that was used in finding the volume of the samples is called the displacement method. This is a process where the volume of the water in the graduated cylinder is calculated before and after the sample is placed. In this lab, the goal of the experiment was to identify and come to consensus about what the unknown substance might be. For this experiment, the required materials were ten pre and post pennies, unknown sample, graduated cylinder, weigh boat, water, paper towels and a weighing scale.

The scientists take careful looks at the rocks to study things like texture, composition, and where the rock came from (OI). That helps them figure out what type of rock it is and what it is useful for. That is why the

Some ways to improve the lab are to make sure that the error sources are fixed. Next time, it should be imperative that the table being used is perfectly balanced and that the tape is not placed on the inside

Therefore we then could have used inaccurate quantities when determining our answer. Another source of error that could have happened would be failure to account for a factor. An example of this would be station number four. To determine the weight of the board we used a leaning tower which had a “hidden” weight.

3. In this experiment, the percent yield was 90%. This number implies that there was little error in this experiment. However, this result could have been caused by certain external factors.

The actual data is the result on our experiment vs theoretical, which is based on the calculations above. I have also learned to pay more attention to draining out all of the product completely before continuing to test the experiment, as any small drop of contaminant can veer our results into a different

But the difference was no bigger than 0.08, and after the values were rounded the same empirical formula was deduced. So the experiment can be concluded as successful. Evaluation: The method used was simple and easy to follow; however, it did not include how much oxygen was needed to react completely. Also it didn 't mention what magnesium oxide looked like after it finished reacting, so it was a guesswork of determining whether the reaction was finished or not.

Materials 1 calibrated thermometer, 1 scale that reads mass, 2 Styrofoam cups, 1 small lead sinker, boiling water in a beaker, 1 pair of kitchen tongs, 1 small cooking pot, stove top, distilled water, and 1 pair of safety goggles (I did not use a cork stopper). III. Procedure First, the beaker

For example, in the response experiment, a yeast solution was prepared without sugar mistakenly and thus had to be prepared again. This suggests that other errors in preparation and measurement could have been encountered. For the future, careful measurements using clean uncontaminated flasks would eliminate possibilities of such error. A source of error for the metabolism experiment involves the yeast’s yellow hue. It is possible that the color of the yeast caused the solution to look more

In this experiment, the amount of water lost in the 0.99 gram sample of hydrated salt was 0.35 grams, meaning that 35.4% of the salt’s mass was water. The unknown salt’s percent water is closest to that of Copper (II) Sulfate Pentahydrate, or CuSO4 ⋅ 5H2O. The percent error from the accepted percent water in CuSO4 ⋅ 5H2O is 1.67%, since the calculated value came out to be 0.6 less than the accepted value of 36.0%.This lab may have had some issues or sources of error, including the possibility of insufficient heating, meaning that some water may not have evaporated, that the scale was uncalibrated, or that the evaporating dish was still hot while being measured. This would have resulted in convection currents pushing up on the plate and making it seem lighter by lifting it up