Intelligence vs. Brain Size

Intelligence vs. Brain sizing Project 2 info army College Algebra 161 November 15, 2012 Intelligence vs. Brain coat The Data Collection digest was designed to instruct students how to collect, and organize, describe and written document info victimization Excel lists and graphs. I chose this particular upshot to explore to advertize my understanding of the phylogeny of human species. Can intelligence and instinct size of it be directly related, and as intelligence increases, what happens to the size of our brains? I conducted my research through the internet by hard-hitting for previous, credi put back research by psyche trained the in the field of Anthropology. The website that I found to have to most usable discipline needed to conduct an prolonged research with adequate background autobiography in the subject was Creation Studies. org. The website contained an phrase written by the institutes chief technical advisor, Steven Rowitt, Th. M. , Ph. D. After reviewi ng the info contained in the article, I was able to cast a hypothesis.My hypothesis is that as homo evolve, and intelligence increases, so does the size of the brain. The tools employ in this project were the website from which I obtained the information and Microsoft excel which I utilise to document and map the data. Using that data I was able to theorise a graph, and a mathematical form that could test and subscribe to my hypothesis. The graph shows you the curl of growth in brain size, per ____(one thousand years.However you decide to chart it)- The mathematical model formulated from the graphed data, bequeath allow future examen to check if the trend still continues, or if the size of a human brain reaches a maximum or minimum. The goal was to chart previous data collected by experts to support my hypothesis as good as predict and test the size of human brains in the future if the trend continued and develop a running(a) equivalence to represent the findings. I began by amass 12 points of data of the total size of human brains at a specific time (years) in history.I save the average size of the brain in the year that correlated it. After collecting the data, I planted the data in Excel and used a outflank line fit to give me a elongated equation/linear backsliding model to represent my data. See table below We entered the data is as follows The fencesitter variable was the make out of pencil eraser destinys which equal the x axis. The dependent variable was how outlying(prenominal) the fruitcake fell, which represented the y axis. We chose a domain of 0 to 25 because the act of rubber bands we used aimd from 0 bands to 15 bands.By choosing a domain or an x-axis of this derive, it gives you a graph that allows you to see the line foregone 15 rubber bands. We went with a range for of 0 to 90 inches because according to our data, the maximum number of inches that the nut case dropped was 67 inches so in order to get a be tter picture of the data we all-inclusive the y-axis to 90 inches. The linear regression model that fitted our data was D(r) = 3. 948r + 5. 758, with the y-intercept being (0, 5. 758) and m= 3. 948 inches.Interpretation for the data in the context of the study establish on our linear regression model, is at zero rubber bands, the lump would beam 5. 758 inches, and with each added rubber band the egg would exceed an additional 3. 948 inches. To test this linear regression equation we were given a length of 67 inches. To mathematically figure for 67 inches to predict the number of rubber bands needed, we solved for (r) as follows D(r) = 3. 948r + 5. 758 67(r) = 3. 948r + 5. 758 r = 15. 5 What we concluded from our mathematical prediction was that it would bring in 15. rubber bands to have a roaring take root of 67 inches. Because it was non down-to-earth to use 15. 5 rubber bands, we went with 15 instead. This was a realistic prediction because the length that the egg fell was 66 inches, without elevated any damage to the egg and expiration us 1 inch from the accredited test pass judgment of 67 inches. Had we used 16 rubber bands instead, based on our linear regression model which states that for any rubber band added the egg would fall an additional 3. 948 inches it would have left our fall around 69. 48 inches and as a go forth leaving us to a greater extent than 2 inches from the original test value of 67 inches. Reasons for error in the project could be based on some(prenominal) components. The elasticity of the rubber bands varies from band to band which would cause a difference in the length of the fall and a permute not resulting in a dispose of 3. 948 inches. During the earlier part of the project, for an unknown reason, provided not as a result of the test, the egg cracked, resulting in a affirmable change in the distribution of the free weight of the egg and affecting the resulting length of the fall.And further more if our linear regression equation was tested in the future, the results may not be the same if another egg was used due to the mass of every egg varying. In summary, after testing several jumps involving a different number of rubber bands each time and save the corresponding length of how far the egg fell we had enough data to plot a scatter graph and formulate a linear regression equation that we could test any hypothesis without having to extract the project itself.Discoveries made during the project was the limiting comparison in the tested data and the mathematical equation formulated by using excel or a scientific calculator. For an example when we tested 1 rubber band, the egg fell 10. 5 inches. Using the equation to solve for the dish out D(r) = 3. 948(r) + 5. 758 D(r) = 3. 948(1) + 5. 758 D(r) = 9. 706 inches The experiment itself and the equation formulated from it, although not precise, it is an accurate representation of real outcomes of the amount of stretch in the rubber bands as shown in the comparison model above.