ibnewB Posted May 16, 2017 Report Share Posted May 16, 2017 So I have written up about 90% of my physics IA, and with my results, I did not get any data that linked to my theory or to my hypothesis and discovered my method did not collect data for my investigation topic. I found a new prac that could potentially fix up this mistake. Is it worth re doing the prac, meaning redoing all the results, or just talk about the new prac in the discussion, and why my method was incorrect? My IA (If you were interested) Looking at vibrational nodes in a tennis racquet by looking at the COR by dropping tennis ball on different parts of the racquet. The bounce height was linear and positively progressing, instead of producing a ___----~~~----___ (supposed to look like graph). I found that it actually affected the forces on the handle on the tennis racquet, but could not find why my results were pos. linear. Ideas and/or suggestions please? Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alessandromasettipl Posted June 13, 2017 Report Share Posted June 13, 2017 Redo it, definitely. It would not be a good IA if you had no data. It's a good IA, and very good talking points, instead use the old method as a reflection, such as in the evaluation. Talk about how such a method could seem practical but is not as usable as the new method. Data is important for the entire Physics IA, without it, you can't get higher than a 4, if you're lucky 1 Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.