Possible Error in 1m/192cm Calculation: Is it Actually 1m/1.92m?

  • Thread starter Thread starter chetzread
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Error Max
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on a potential error in the calculation of 100cm/192cm, questioning whether it should be expressed as 1m/1.92m instead. Participants clarify that the correct interpretation is (100/192) cm, which equates to approximately 0.52 cm or 0.0052 m, not 1/1.92 m. The distinction is made that this is an absolute error rather than a fractional one, emphasizing that the latter would suggest a much larger error. The confusion arises from the way the measurement is expressed, but the calculations confirm the smaller value. Ultimately, the correct interpretation is confirmed as (100/192) cm.
chetzread
Messages
798
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


i suspect the possible error of 100cm/192cm = 1m /192 m is wrong , IMO , it should be 1m /1.92m , right ?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution

 

Attachments

  • IMG_20161014_101532.jpg
    IMG_20161014_101532.jpg
    31.8 KB · Views: 444
Physics news on Phys.org
chetzread said:
100cm/192cm
It is not 100cm/192cm. It is (100/192) cm, which is (1/192) m.
 
  • Like
Likes chetzread
haruspex said:
It is not 100cm/192cm. It is (100/192) cm, which is (1/192) m.
why ? i still didnt get it ? could you explain further ?
 
haruspex said:
It is not 100cm/192cm. It is (100/192) cm, which is (1/192) m.
why not (1 / 1.92 ) m ?
 
chetzread said:
why ? i still didnt get it ? could you explain further ?
It is not a fractional error, like 100 parts in 192 parts, which would be over 50%. It is an absolute error of the distance (100/192)cm, or a bit over 0.5cm. Why they would choose to express it that way I have no idea.
 
  • Like
Likes chetzread
chetzread said:
why not (1 / 1.92 ) m ?
Because that would be over 50cm, 100 times the error.
 
  • Like
Likes chetzread
haruspex said:
It is not a fractional error, like 100 parts in 192 parts, which would be over 50%. It is an absolute error of the distance (100/192)cm, or a bit over 0.5cm. Why they would choose to express it that way I have no idea.
do you mean it's 100/192 = 0.52cm = 0.0052m (1/192) ?
 
chetzread said:
do you mean it's 100/192 = 0.52cm = 0.0052m (1/192) ?
Yes.
 
  • Like
Likes chetzread

Similar threads

Correct Calculation of Vertical Stress in Soil
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Car Wheel Statics: Calculating Radial Force at 1m
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Fan Manufacturer: 145W to Move 1kg of Air 1m
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
7K
Power lost due to friction in a propeller
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
1-D Heat Distribution in Long Cylinder
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Thermal Resistance due to Convection Heat Transfer
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Compressing Gas: Work Done Calculation
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Converting Units: Solving a Simple Density Problem
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Vertical foce of fluid jet split in two
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Problem with values for a bending moment diagram
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K