…..Introduction …show more content…
This data does support the hypothesis because the evaporation did work. The evaporation did take a while for the results to show up. But when the evaporation did show up it took only a few days for them to change. By the end of the experiment salt was the one to evaporate the most……………..
…………..Each trial has different numbers. The first trial has the average of each number that started off different. The second trial had some of the same numbers from the first. Some in the second decreased a lot more as seen in the graph. Trial three had some numbers decrease but others might have taken awhile for them to change also check the graphs to see the results…………….
…………..The units in trial one and measurements were observed daily and recorded on a chart. The results for trial two also took a while for changes to show up. By the end water, salt and nail polish remover evaporated the most. The units and measurements were as well checked daily for specific change. The changes in trial three made the numbers different from the other two trials. Some of the numbers decreased but not by a lot. In the end salt was the additive to evaporate the most. As well as the other two the units and measurements were checked daily for any changes in the …show more content…
The reason could be that how ice would change anything in the experiment ad in the end the data numbers would change. The errors that could be would be that with the measuring cups they could be checked carefully instead of estimating the numbers. The purpose of still doing further research is because of how much has been evaporated and seeing the evaporation work with the additives. In the end also being able to see which one evaporated the most. The next step would be putting the measuring cups outside to see if it evaporates faster with the