Calculating Significant Figures for Mole Quantity to Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter DarthRoni
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Significant figures
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of mass from a mole quantity using significant figures, exploring different approaches to rounding and the implications of measurement precision. Participants examine the order of operations in calculations involving multiplication and addition, as well as the relevance of significant figures in these contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant outlines a method for calculating mass from moles and molar mass, suggesting that significant figures should not be applied until the final result is obtained.
  • Another participant agrees that rounding should occur only at the end, asserting this as the correct approach.
  • A different perspective is presented, emphasizing the importance of considering measurement errors and the uncertainty associated with significant figures, suggesting that error propagation could provide a more accurate representation of precision.
  • Participants discuss the historical context of significant figures and rounding practices, noting that modern computational methods may reduce the importance of these considerations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on the best approach to handling significant figures during calculations. Some participants advocate for rounding only at the end, while others emphasize the importance of measurement precision and error propagation.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention that the precision of measurements affects the number of significant figures, and that the uncertainty in measurements can influence the final result. There is an acknowledgment of the limitations of significant figures as a method of representing precision.

DarthRoni
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
I am trying to convert a mole quantity into a mass. ##m_{CO_2}## will represent mass, ##M_{CO_2}## will represent molar mass and ##n_{CO_2}## will represent mole quantity.
I have ##n_{CO_2} = 3.3## and ##M_{CO_2} = (12.01 + 2(16.00))##
So, ##m_{CO_2} = 3.3(12.01 + 2(16.00))##
If I compute the value of ##M_{CO_2}## first,
##m_{CO_2} = 3.3(44.01)## I don't have to round yet, since I am still only using significant figures.
I then complete my multiplication and due to 3.3 only having 2 significant figures, I get ##m_{CO_2} = 1.5 * 10^2##.

If I distribute in the following way:
##m_{CO_2} = 3.3(12.01) + 3.3(2)(16.00)##
I have to make sure each term only have 2 significant figures
##m_{CO_2} = 40 + 110 = 1.5 * 10^2##
My textbook suggest that I reduce rounding errors by grouping similar operations. Is one way better than the other?
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
Personally, I don't think you should round anything until the final result is obtained. In that case, the order of operations is irrelevant.
 
DarthRoni said:
My textbook suggest that I reduce rounding errors by grouping similar operations. Is one way better than the other?

In ancient times, when multiplication was done on paper, using less digits and tricks that allowed to maintain accuracy with using less digits were valuable as they could be use to speed up calculations. As of today they don't matter.

That being said, in numerical methods sometimes it is important to know what you are doing to not loose accuracy, but that's a completely different thing.
 
So let me get this straight, I can do all my operations and then only involve my significant figures at the end? Regardless if there's both addition and multiplication?
 
DarthRoni said:
I can do all my operations and then only involve my significant figures at the end?

Yes.

Actually it is the only correct way.
 
Actually, if you really want to know the precision of your calculation, you should take into account that the number of significant figures is typically due to measurement errors, e.g. the amount of moles has only been measured with a certain precision and the molar mass is only known with some uncertainty e.g. due to variations in isotopic composition.
Typically, the uncertainty is of the order of the last figure given e.g. n=3.3 (+/- 0.1).
Then you could use error propagation to determine the uncertainty of your final result.
The number of significant figures is a way to approximate this method.
There is lots to be found on the internet, e.g.:
http://www.rit.edu/~w-uphysi/uncertainties/Uncertaintiespart2.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks guys !
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
11K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K