Converting to SI units w/ significant digits & scientific notation

AI Thread Summary
To convert 2 years into seconds, the calculation yields 31,536,000 seconds, which can be expressed in scientific notation as 3.15 x 10^7 with three significant digits. The discussion highlights that the coefficient in scientific notation must be between 1 and 10. The discrepancy between the calculated answer and the book's answer (3.16 x 10^7) arises from the book using 365.25 days per year to account for leap years. This average is essential for accurate conversions over longer periods. Understanding this average is crucial for precise scientific calculations.
delgeezee
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hi.
I'm asked to convert 2 year into the SI Unit seconds:

Known:
1 Hr = 3600 s
1 Day = 86400 s

So using a calculator...
1 yr = 365*86,400 = 31,536,000

I want to express the answer in scientific notation:

Because the lesser number on has 3 significant digits, the scientific notation will also be expressed w/ 3 significant digits. Correct?

The coefficient in scientific notation must be greater then 1 and less then 10. Correct?

My answer:
3.15 * 10^{7}
Book's answer:
3.16 * 10^{7}

Why does the book's answer have it rounded up?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
They must have used 365.25 days for the length of a year.

Chet
 
Chestermiller said:
They must have used 365.25 days for the length of a year.

Chet

Thank you for the reply. At first I thought you were joking & the book made no mention. I had no idea 365.25 is the average number of days in a year.
 
delgeezee said:
Thank you for the reply. At first I thought you were joking & the book made no mention. I had no idea 365.25 is the average number of days in a year.

You might say it's a bit of a leap :smile:
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top