4. Discussion

4. Discussion

➜ 4.1 & 4.2 : Analysis of Results and Key findings
Data graphs: Figure 2.x are incomplete graphs, Figure.3x are complete graphs.

⬅ Figure 2.1
(February 24, 8am to 3pm)

⬅ Figure 2.2
(February 25, 4pm to February 26, 8am)

⬅ Figure 2.3
(February 26, 8 am to 12pm)

⬅ Figure 3.1
(March 1, 8am to March 2, 8am)

⬅ Figure 3.2
(March 2, 8am to March 3, 8am)

Although our data may not be accurate as compared to data recorded by professionals, it is still actual data and it proves that our antenna does work.

From Figure 4.1 and 4.2 below, we can prove that though our data is not as accurate as professional recordings, but it is still actual data and it proves our antenna does work. In Figure 4.1, there is a point around the same time in the same day in the professional data where there is a signal disturbance which was eventually deleted out by the data keepers. As our graph does not have the ability to delete disturbances, it is depicted as a very sudden rise of signal strength and sudden drop when it returns to normal.

Figure 4.1 (comparison of professional data and our data)

In Figure 4.2 below, we have our own uncompleted graph and two graphs recorded by  professionals. At around the same time and day, there was a spike which dropped slowly and had a sudden spike again at the same time, as shown in the graphs. These two figures show that our data has a certain degree of reliability.
Figure 4.2 (Comparison of professional data and our data)

➜ 4.3 Explanation of key findings

Our key findings shows that the sun has been active lately. There are some abnormalities explained earlier but in most cases there was a C class flare every few days and a M class flare every few weeks not in our recordings. We also observed that there is a small sunrise/sunset signature in our full graphs, which at sunrise and sunset there is a change in signal strength.

➜ 4.4 Evaluation of Hypothesis

Our hypothesis is proven, as we were able to measure the solar flares to some degree though there were disturbances and some incomplete graphs.

Our Graphs were different from the three websites we used for reference, but still had much similarity in many places and so, we think that our hypothesis was proven correct through our experiment which data shown that it is possible to detect solar flares through the SuperSID radio receiver.

In explaining key findings and evaluating hypothesis, need to make reference to other research to support your findings.

4.5 Areas for improvement

Areas of improvement
In the area of results.
We do not know the specific unit of the signal strength.
We should research more on the use of the units as we could not define the exact unit.
If we get to find out the conversion of the unit, our results will be more accurate as compared to having arbitrary units.
In the area of antenna construction.
We used a wire connector as there was not enough wire. the connection  might have affected results.
Get the right amount of wire length.
It is convenient for us and not so troublesome as we do not need a wire connector
In the area of equipment purchase.
We had a problem where the wood did not arrive and we could not start the experiment.
As a team, we should have prepared the materials beforehand.
It is better for us as currently, when the materials have not arrived, we could not spend time wisely.

No comments:

Post a Comment