-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0 -0.06 -0.03 0 0.03 0.06 (k ) $_{F}$a -1 T+I-V FIG. 4: Testing the generalized virial theorem. The difference between the measured release energy and potential energy per particle T + I − V is shown as open circles. This corresponds to the left hand side of Eq. 3. Filled circles show the right hand side of Eq. 3 obtained from the average values of the contact shown in Fig. 2. The two quantities are equal to within the measurement uncertainty, which is on order of 0 . 01 E$_{F}$ . as for the unitarity gas, where ( k$_{F}$a ) − 1 = 0. This result for the unitarity gas was previously verified in Ref. [28]. Here, we test Eqn. 3 for a range of interaction strengths. In Fig. 4 we plot the measured difference T + I − V versus ( k$_{F}$a ) − 1 along with C 4 πk$_{F}$ $_{a}$, where we use our direct measurements of C . We find that these independent measurements of the left and the right sides of Eqn. 3 agree to within our error, which is roughly 1% of the Fermi energy. It is interesting to note that the measured energy difference T + I − V is small (in units of E$_{F}$ ), so that even a Fermi gas with a strongly attractive contact interaction nearly obeys the non-interacting virial equation. In conclusion, we have measured the integrated contact for a strongly interacting Fermi gas and demonstrated the connection between the 1 /k 4 tail of the momentum distribution and the high frequency tail of rf spectra. Combining a measurement of C vs ( k$_{F}$a ) − 1 with measurements of the potential energy and the release energy of the trapped gas, we verify two universal relationships [2, 3], namely the adiabatic sweep theorem and the generalized 9