deletions | additions       diff --git a/FloatBarrier_For_thi.tex b/FloatBarrier_For_thi.tex  index 32d2f4c..1cb5aa6 100644  --- a/FloatBarrier_For_thi.tex  +++ b/FloatBarrier_For_thi.tex 
...
\FloatBarrier For this particular subset of data background was not subtracted off, since the data appears to oscillate about the x-axis. because \textbf{because  there does not seem to be any apparent background to this data.\\ data}. NOT A SENTENCE. \\  To analyze this data, values of the maximum peak value, and minimum dip values were taken. In order to reduce error, maxima and minima were found by fitting a quadratic function to a small range of data close to the perceived maximum and minimum values. Once these values were found the measured spacings ($\Delta E$) between the maxima and minima of the Franck-Hertz curve were plotted against the minimum order (n) of the peaks and dips. Theoretically, the measured spacing between maxima or minima should increase linearly, due to the additional acceleration of electrons over the mean free path. If the electron beam has been accelerated to a potential that is equal to the discrete energy of the first excited level of Neon, inelastic collisions will occur. However, an electron must be close to a Neon atom in order for a collision to take place. The average distance that the electrons moves before the collision is known as the mean free path, $\lambda$. The electrons continue to gain energy over $\lambda$. If $\delta_{n}$ represents the energy gained by an electron over the mean free path, for $n$ inelastic collisions, the energy gained is:\\  \begin{equation} 
...
E_n [eV] (Dips) = (-0.170\pm1.0)n + (19.45\pm3.2)  \end{equation}  As seen in Figure 4 the intercept at $n=0.5$ is $12.5 eV$, which is quite different from the expect value of $16.61906936eV$. For the dips it is a little bit better at a value of $~19eV$. It is unlikely that even with the inclusion of error, the measured value for the lowest excited energy would match the expected value. This may be because the Franck-Hertz curve collected only had 3 dip values and 2 peak values. Had more dips and peaks been observed before ionization, the intercept at $n=(0.5)$ might have been closer to the expected value.  \FloatBarrier