Kirchhoff's Law Lab Report

The first chapter of “Law in America” by Lawrence M. Friedman is an introduction to the formation of the law system that we have in the United States today. The opening of the chapter depicts how Freidman starts his lectures, by reading the front few pages of the local newspaper to his very lethargic students who take his early class. At first, this seems odd given that this is not a political science class or media lecture. However, the logic behind this process is that in every “domestic” article in the news there is a connection to the law. Law is intertwined in almost every situation we face during, not only our day to day lives but also the very structure that forms the environment we live in.

Marwah Alabbad Post lab 10/21/15 Question 1: 1. Experiment 1: Number of trails NaOH concentration (M) Volume of HCl solution (mL) Initial volume of NaOH(mL) final volume of NaOH(mL) The volume of NaOH to titrate HCl (mL) Concentration of HCl (M) 1st 0.1023 25.0 10.05 36.12 26.07 0.085 2nd 0.1023 25.0 5.74 31.40 25.66 0.105 3rd 0.1023 25.0 9.84 35.52 25.68 0.105 First trail calculation: 0.02607L× (0.1023mole NaOH/1L)×(1 mol of HCL/1 mol of NaOH)×(1/0.025)= 0.085M of HCl

For this experiment we utilized varying forms of Ohm’s law (V=IR), rules for resistors in series (Rtotal=R1+R2+…) and parallels (1/Rt=1/R1+1/R2+⋯), and Kirchhoff’s Junction Rule (ΣIi=0). For these models we assumed that the DMM’s produced accurate readings

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%

The hypothesis made, the density calculated in the experiment will stay the same because the density of the unidentified object will never change, was supported. The results support the hypothesis because in every trial the density always came out to 9g/mL. In trial one the mass was 71.16g, the volume was 8mL, and the density was 8.895g/mL, but when rounded to the proper sig fig came out to 9g/mL. In trial two the mass was 71.12g, the volume was 8mL, and the density was 8.89g/mL, but when rounded to the proper sig fig came out to 9g/mL. In trial three the mass was 71.14g, the volume was 8mL, and the density was 8.8925g/mL, but when rounded to the proper sig fig came out to 9g/mL. When averaged the mass was 71.14g, the volume was 8mL, and the density was 9g/mL. Errors that could have occurred are, not calculating the density correctly, not completely submerging the unidentified object with water in the graduated cylinder to get the volume, not rounding the sig figs correctly when finding the density, not measuring the unidentified object’s mass in grams, not measuring the unidentified object’s volume in milliliters, and not writing the correct units with the proper number or not the correct unit at all.

The data from the laboratory experiment are shown in Table 1. Table 1: Time taken for the cat to escape from the puzzle box Attempt Time taken for the cat to escape from the puzzle box (seconds) 1. 63 2. 60 3. 45 4.

The case of R. v. Schoenborn is a troubling case involving the death of three children and the defence of not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder. This defence must be critically analyzed along with the evidence and expert opinions as it could absolve the accused of the charges. As well, the precedent that the verdict provides is critical to the legal system and its future implication and thus give the decision more importance. After a thorough examination of the facts, it is evident that the verdict of the Supreme Court of British Columbia is correct and reflects the administration’s objectives and beliefs. This will be demonstrated through the application of legal principles and elements.

B. Kraus’ “conduct” grabbing Hardy by the arm will not be dismissed as a de minimis infraction The second issue is whether Kraus’ “conduct” was of a too trivial nature to warrant conviction. Kraus’ grabbing Hardy, pulling him around to face her, and digging her fingers into his bicep are not considered “too trivial” to be dismissed as a de minimis infraction. In New Jersey, there is a possibility that conduct “too trivial to warrant the condemnation of conviction” may be dismissed as a de minimis infraction under NJ Rev Stat § 2C:2-11 (2013).

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

All the experiment was depending on fortune and luck and can not be successful at all because the performers do not have proper direction to perform the experiment. For the experiment, workers should have proper equipment, standardise and should have power to do work their own way. It is also concluded that the quality of production might be great in future by use the present statics and create a quality control chart and solve the problem in specific problems which effects the project. The common wisdom is that if only people did not make so many mistakes, there would not be so many problems. But even with the variation contributed by the people reduced to zero, there are still too many red

List the theoretical values must be shown by circuits if both are working properly. 2. Help Emilio during testing procedures and ensure that he is following the procedures correctly. 3. Record all the test results and communicate immediately to Hishan if any fault is discerned.

In this lab there were five different stations. For the first station we had to determine an unknown mass and the percent difference. To find the unknown mass we set up the equation Fleft*dleft = Fright*dright. We then substituted in the values (26.05 N * 41cm = 34cm * x N) and solved for Fright to get (320.5g). To determine the percent difference we used the formula Abs[((Value 1 - Value 2) / average of 1 & 2) * 100], substituted the values (Abs[((320.5 - 315.8) /

Sem_1 DB#2 QUESTION: What key information will you need to learn in your interview with the client? To collect key information and learn about the client’s situation, it would be important to ask the following questions. Basic Information: • What is your purpose of preparing a prenuptial agreement?

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