Assume independent normally distributed angle errors with known standard deviation . The relevant chi-squared test uses the sum of squared standardized residuals,
For the model through the origin, the predictions and residuals, expressed in milliradians, are
Consequently . There are statistical degrees of freedom. The upper-tail P-value is approximately ; equivalently the value greatly exceeds the critical value . The zero-intercept model is strongly rejected under the stated errors.
For the alternative linear regression, minimize . Setting both partial derivatives to zero gives the normal equations, whose solution is
For these data , , and . This yields
The new predictions are , with residuals . Therefore
The affine model is compatible with the data. Allowing for its additional fitted parameter, the decrease has a chi-squared distribution with one statistical degree of freedom under the nested zero-intercept hypothesis, corresponding to . Thus the model with a fitted intercept provides the better description, rather than merely lowering the residual by adding a parameter.
With the measurement variance treated as known, the coefficient uncertainties are
Hence , about standard deviations above zero. A positive constant systematic error in the angular zero, or an additional nearly constant torque, could account for it. Its presence is evidence against the ideal zero-intercept model; four points alone do not identify the physical cause uniquely. A calibration error in only rescales the inferred gravitational constant and cannot remove this residual pattern.
Using the fitted slope after allowing for this offset would give , with the period and slope errors combined in quadrature. This is conditional on the constant-offset model.

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.