Large percentage problem: check my work please?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Holocene
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Check my work Work
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the percentage of the universe's age that corresponds to a human lifespan of 100 years. Participants explore the mathematical steps involved in the calculation, the accuracy of the results, and the implications of significant figures in scientific notation.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning, Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant calculates that a 100-year lifespan represents approximately .0000007% of the universe's age, which is 13.7 billion years.
  • Another participant provides a more precise calculation, suggesting the result is closer to 7.2992700729927 x 10^-8%.
  • A third participant expresses confusion over the calculations, questioning the accuracy of the exponent used in the denominator.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the correct exponent for billion years, with one participant asserting that 13.7 billion years should be represented as 1.37 x 10^10.
  • Multiple participants point out a typographical error in the exponent, correcting it to indicate that the correct result is 7.2992700729927 x 10^-7% instead of 7.2992700729927 x 10^-8%.
  • One participant comments on the irony of the situation, noting that the initial contributor arrived at a correct answer by accident, while also critiquing the precision of the answers given based on the reliability of the data.
  • Another participant suggests settling on a rounded figure of 7.3 x 10^-7% for clarity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the correct mathematical approach but disagree on the significance of the precision in the final answer. There is no consensus on the appropriateness of providing highly precise figures given the context of the data.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved issues regarding the significance of the digits in the calculations, as well as the implications of using scientific notation in this context.

Holocene
Messages
237
Reaction score
0
The universe is thought to be 13.7 Billions years old. If you lived to be 100, what percentage of the total age of the universe would coincide with your lifetime?

I get .0000007% or seven 10-Millionths of one percent.

Is this correct?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
[tex]\frac{100}{1.37\cdot10^{10}} \cdot 100 = \frac{10^4}{1.37\cdot 10^{10}} = \frac{1}{1.37\cdot10^6} = 7.2992700729927\cdot 10^{-8}[/tex]

So you got close, but there's a bit more accurate.
 
I'm a bit confused here.

1 / 1.37 x 10^6 = 1 / 1,370,000 = 0.00000073 = 7.3 x 10^-7

7.3 x 10^-7 does not equal 7.2992700729927 x 10^-8

What am I doing wrong?
 
Well first when you have 13.7 BILLION years the exponent of the 10 is 9, not 6. 6 Is for million. So its 13.7 x 10^9. 13.7 is 1.37 x 10, so it becomes 1.37x10^10

I don't see what the problem should be, you have the right answer in the beginning! I just gave it a bit more accurately.
 
Gib Z said:
I don't see what the problem should be, you have the right answer in the beginning! I just gave it a bit more accurately.

You did the right steps, just made a typo at the end.

[tex]\frac{1}{1.37\cdot10^6} = 7.2992700729927\cdot 10^{-7}[/tex]
not
[tex]\frac{1}{1.37\cdot10^6} = 7.2992700729927\cdot 10^{-8}[/tex]
 
Moo Of Doom said:
You did the right steps, just made a typo at the end.

[tex]\frac{1}{1.37\cdot10^6} = 7.2992700729927\cdot 10^{-7}[/tex]
not
[tex]\frac{1}{1.37\cdot10^6} = 7.2992700729927\cdot 10^{-8}[/tex]

Damn it! Yes Moo's right...
 
I find this thread really ironic. Holocene got the most correct answer, though apparently by accident of inexperience with his calculator and scientific notation etc.

Gib Z and Moo, you should know it's bad form to give an answers to 15+ significant digits when the data on which the calculations are based is dubious at even two or three significant digits.
 
Last edited:
uart said:
Gib Z and Moo, you should know it's bad form to give an answers to 15+ significant digits when the data on which the calculations are based is dubious at even two or three significant digits.

14 hehe..Lets settle with [itex]7.3 \cdot 10^{-7}[/itex] :)
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
8K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K