Name: Shrey Lab Partner: Seo-Young Date: 09/22/2011

The Size of a Match Affecting the Height of the Image

Introduction: Background Information: We are going to be finding the change in the image height as the objects height changes. From this, we can find the magnification, because the magnification is the height of the image divided by the height of the object.
Aim: How does the size of the match affect the image height? Hypothesis: When the length of the match is bigger, the image height will be bigger. I think it will be proportionate, as the change of the match is also proportionate, and we are keeping many things controlled. Independent variable: The lengths of the match, 1.5cm, 2cm, 2.5cm, 3cm, and 3.5cm. Dependent variable: The height of the image under a magnifying glass. Controlled variable: distance between the match and magnifying glass 5 cm, magnifying glass, rulers

Materials and Methods: Materials: magnifying glass, 5 matches, 2 rulers, tape, pocket paper cutter Procedure: 1. Cut the matches into five different lengths - 1.5cm, 2cm, 2.5cm, 3cm, and 3.5cm. 2. Tape 1 ruler onto table so we can see how long 5 cm is. 3. Put the magnifying glass above the match and look at the change in size. The distance between the match and magnifying glass should be controlled as 5cm. 4. Measure the image height of the match shown on the magnifying glass with the ruler. Measure it for each length. 5. Note the measurements for each length down. 6. Repeat 1 to 5 three times to get accurate measurements. Diagram:

Name: Shrey Lab Partner: Seo-Young Date: 09/22/2011 Results: Raw Table: image height/cm length of match/cm 1st 2nd 3rd Average 1.5 1.8 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.9 2.9 3.0 3.0 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.1 3.9

1.8 2.4 2.9 3.4 4.0

Processed Data and Analysis:

The Change in Image Height When the Object Height is Changed

4.5 I 4 m a 3.5 g e 3 H 2.5 e i 2 g h 1.5 t 1 ( c m 0.5 ) 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 Object Height (cm) 2.5 3 3.5 4

We found that the image height was always larger than the object height. As the object height went up, so did the image height. And we can also tell that the trend line is directly proportionate to 0. Discussion:

Name: Shrey Lab Partner: Seo-Young Date: 09/22/2011 Conclusion: My hypothesis was correct. We could see that my information was proportionate, as my graphs trend line ended up reaching to 0 if it was stretched out. I found that the image height grew 0.4-0.6 cm from the object height. I think that this was quite well, and my hypothesis had a perfect prediction. Evaluation: Our data might seem quite accurate from the graph, but honestly, I dont feel like it was too accurate. This is because I had to use a ruler to measure the height of the image, and the height of the image had to be measure above the magnifying glass. This meant that my hand was very shaky, and I couldnt tell the exact measurement, and so I think that maybe my information was off by 0.1cm+/-. Another thing that came into factor was the fact that we couldnt get exactly how much we cut the matches. We used a pocket paper knife, and we marked the point with a pencil, so I think that we were off by 0.1 cm +/-. But our graph shows that our data is quite reliable. I think this because we werent off by that much, and the graph didnt show that. Our graph shows that our information is very close together, and it is in a pattern. It fits in the trend lines. If I were to do this again, I would use a measuring tape instead of a ruler, and I would use something more easily to cut than a match. Final Conclusion: Our work was not very reliable, but according to the graph, our work was very valid.