My first trial was less than satisfactory. I did not account for the variables of throwing objects out a window and therefore my data was unreliable. My hypothesis that the heavier object would break more readily in regards to Newton’s Second Law of Motion, F=M*A, was a spurious correlation. I needed to do my experiment again, this time accounting for volume by ensuring that each piece of material was the same size and dropped at the same distance. I chose a standard piece of paper, 8.5 by 11, and the materials foam, bubble wrap, and card stock with the new hypothesis that the bubble wrap would provide the best protection. The results that I observed are best explained using Newton’s 3rd Law of Motion,.“For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.” In order to ensure impact was minimal, the packaging needed to cushion the fall of the potato chips, helping it decelerate at a much slower
My first trial was less than satisfactory. I did not account for the variables of throwing objects out a window and therefore my data was unreliable. My hypothesis that the heavier object would break more readily in regards to Newton’s Second Law of Motion, F=M*A, was a spurious correlation. I needed to do my experiment again, this time accounting for volume by ensuring that each piece of material was the same size and dropped at the same distance. I chose a standard piece of paper, 8.5 by 11, and the materials foam, bubble wrap, and card stock with the new hypothesis that the bubble wrap would provide the best protection. The results that I observed are best explained using Newton’s 3rd Law of Motion,.“For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.” In order to ensure impact was minimal, the packaging needed to cushion the fall of the potato chips, helping it decelerate at a much slower