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:
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top