4 ms·

2600 only has 2 significant digits. It's not an exact number.

defanor 2y ago
Unless the precision (resolution) is known (stated), it is unclear whether the trailing zeroes are significant or not, one may only guess (while such a guess looks reasonable in this case). A convention for writing that unambiguously is to avoid insignificant trailing zeroes: e.g., writing it as 26e2 or 2.6e3. Then the written number carries along its precision.
golol 2y ago
Doesn't writing out the trailing zeroes mean that you clain 4 significant digits? At least in the physics context.
- busyant 2y ago
  I think there are a few conventions for expressing sig digits. Where I was taught… 2600 has 2 sd 2600. Has 4 sd 2.6e3 has 2sd 2.60e3 has 3 sd Edit. If I had been in charge of setting sd rules, I would’ve said … 2600 has 4 sd 260? Has 3 sd 26?? Has 2 sd The fact zeros are overloaded (they can be placeholders or they can actually mean 0) is confusing to students.
olddustytrail 2y ago
This reminds me of Andrew Scott Waugh, who surveyed the height of Mount Everest. He was sure his method was accurate to the nearest foot but he measured the height of the mountain at exactly 29,000 feet. Since he thought people would assume it was a rounded figure, he reported it as 29,002. And is therefore known as the man who first put 2 feet on the top of Everest.
lostlogin 2y ago
I’m pre coffee so go easy. How do I write the exact number 2600 if 2600 isn’t an exact number?
- zamadatix 2y ago
  In contexts significant figures might be relevant, a bar over the last 0 or a decimal point at the end are the easiest methods of saying "no really, these 0s are the real deal". Though you have other options like scientific notation, an explicit uncertainty bound, or natural language context too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significant_figures#Ways_to_denote_significant_figures_in_an_integer_with_trailing_zeros https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significant_figures#Ways_to_de...

Unless the precision (resolution) is known (stated), it is unclear whether the trailing zeroes are significant or not, one may only guess (while such a guess looks reasonable in this case). A convention for writing that unambiguously is to avoid insignificant trailing zeroes: e.g., writing it as 26e2 or 2.6e3. Then the written number carries along its precision.

golol 2y ago

Doesn't writing out the trailing zeroes mean that you clain 4 significant digits? At least in the physics context.

busyant 2y ago
I think there are a few conventions for expressing sig digits. Where I was taught… 2600 has 2 sd 2600. Has 4 sd 2.6e3 has 2sd 2.60e3 has 3 sd Edit. If I had been in charge of setting sd rules, I would’ve said … 2600 has 4 sd 260? Has 3 sd 26?? Has 2 sd The fact zeros are overloaded (they can be placeholders or they can actually mean 0) is confusing to students.

olddustytrail 2y ago

This reminds me of Andrew Scott Waugh, who surveyed the height of Mount Everest. He was sure his method was accurate to the nearest foot but he measured the height of the mountain at exactly 29,000 feet. Since he thought people would assume it was a rounded figure, he reported it as 29,002. And is therefore known as the man who first put 2 feet on the top of Everest.

lostlogin 2y ago

I’m pre coffee so go easy. How do I write the exact number 2600 if 2600 isn’t an exact number?

zamadatix 2y ago
In contexts significant figures might be relevant, a bar over the last 0 or a decimal point at the end are the easiest methods of saying "no really, these 0s are the real deal". Though you have other options like scientific notation, an explicit uncertainty bound, or natural language context too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significant_figures#Ways_to_denote_significant_figures_in_an_integer_with_trailing_zeros https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significant_figures#Ways_to_de...