deletions | additions       diff --git a/From_equation_7_the_intercept__.tex b/From_equation_7_the_intercept__.tex  index 7d4f567..b0316e0 100644  --- a/From_equation_7_the_intercept__.tex  +++ b/From_equation_7_the_intercept__.tex 
...
From equation 7 the intercept at $n=0.5$ is found to be $19.4 eV$. eV\pm4.2$.  The value found for $E_{a}$  usingboth  the short mean free limit and ($19.54\pm1.48$) does not match the expected value of $E_{a}$ ($16.6eV$) for Neon I within uncertainty. However, the value found for $E_{a}$ using  the long mean free limit are not consistent with the known values given ($19.4\pm4.2$) does match  the estimated error. Furthermore the percent error on the values expected value  of $E_{a}$ is $14.19 \%$, which is relatively high. This for Neon I within uncertainty. Thus we  may be because conclude that although  the data ionized before a sufficient amount values  of dips have been recorded. Had more dips been observed before ionization, $\Delta E$ look equivalent in Figure 4,  the intercept at $n=0.5$ might have been closer to mean free path may still be significant, since  the expected value. long mean free limit better approximates the values of $E_{a}$.