1.

(refer to table)
Sourc
e
1 1:
2
3 2:
4 3:
5 4:
6
5:

Brass (specific heat,

Glass (specific heat,
Titanium (specific heat,
J/gC)
J/gC)
J/gC)
0.38
0.84
N/A
http://www2.ucdsb.on.ca/tiss/stretton/Database/Specific_Heat_Capacity_Table.ht
0.38
0.84 m
N/A
0.38
N/A
0.54
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsy.edu/hbase/tables.sphtt.html
N/A
0.837
N/A
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/specific-heat-metals-d_152.html
N/A
N/A
0.52
http://faculty.wwu.edu/vawter/PhysicsNet/Topics/Thermal/HeatCapTable.html
N/A
N/A
0.523
http://www.periodictable.com/Elements/022/data.html
http://owl.cengage.com/departments/GenChemKotz7eDemo0709/appendix/Spec
ificHeats.html

6:
2. In an experiment, the values required often need to be as accurate (and
precise) as possible. This implies having the most significant figures tacked
on after the decimal place; as demonstrated by the Horseshoes and Handgrenades activity completed in class, the smallest difference between
experimental and actual measurements can yield drastically different results.
In the case of the specific heat of Brass, Glass, and Titanium, it would be wise
to use the values of 0.38, 0.837, and 0.523, respectively.
3. Differences between values can be attributed to a variety of sources,
specifically in varying instrumentation as well as material sample tested. With
regards to the type of measuring devices used, as my partner and I
discovered in the lab, using different instrumentation for measuring the
lengths of the sides of a block of wood yielded lengths with different numbers
of significant digits after the decimal place; the difference in side length
between that measured with a micrometer and a ruler was shocking, showing
that instrumentation really does make a difference in the ultimate quantity to
be measured. Also, miniscule inconsistencies between materials can also
impact the final value. A microscopic fracture, an un-sanded wooden ridge,
can all impact the tenths, hundredths, thousandths decimal place. Perhaps
the glass samples, even the Titanium samples used above to calculate
specific heat (0.54 and 0.52) had un-negligible incongruities, the origin for
inconsistency between measurements.