| When studying the information
received in our experiment, we found some interesting points.
What we had to do was compare hearing at three different distances
under water, to hearing at the same three distances above water.
We hoped that the reception of sound would drop off, or lessen,
as the distance grew larger. We thought this would happen because
that is what is expected when measuring sound above water. In
our previous research, we found that sound travels at least five
times faster under water than it does in air. I hope that our
results would support this information.
Our results show that when sound travels through air, the reception decreases as distance increases. When increasing by 10 feet, we found that although there was not a definite pattern, besides the general lessening, our expectations were met. We also used this information as a control for the recording of data under water.
The under water sound reception experiment gave results that had no pattern at all. This information could have been produced because there was an error in our lab. The results "bounced" from 2.731 to 3.851 to 3.324. The expected results were that it would follow the same pattern as sound reception above water but our hypothesis obviously did not match the real results. The error in our results could have been because of interference in the pool, faulty equipment or the varying sounds from the air horn.
In the future, if we were to repeat the experiment, we would most likely find a source of sound that was more consistent. The air horn that we used was difficult to keep constant. The amount of pressure and length of time pressed could affect the results of the experiment greatly. If there were a more regulated air horn or other sound maker that would be a better instrument for this lab. Otherwise, we would hope that if this experiment were repeated it would be more consistent and controlled.