Significant digits in intermediate answers

  • Thread starter Thread starter purpledonkey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Significant digits
AI Thread Summary
Intermediate answers in calculations can include results from all steps leading to the final answer, not just those within the same calculation. In the example provided, the results from steps 1 and 2 should be treated as intermediate answers, rounded to 3 significant digits plus one additional digit to minimize roundoff error. This approach helps maintain accuracy throughout the calculation process. The final answer should then be reported in 3 significant digits. Proper handling of significant digits is crucial for precision in scientific calculations.
purpledonkey
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Just wondering if anyone could clarify what qualifies as an intermediate answer. Is this limited to answers within the same calculation, or all the answers from steps leading to the final one?

ie. What is the current needed to produce 10.0g of lithium in 1.00h?

Step 1: Determine moles of Li and thus moles of e- involved.
Step 2: Multiply moles of e- by farads.
Step 3: Calculate the current.

So, are the answers to steps 1&2 considered 'final' and rounded to 3 digits, or intermediate and rounded to 3+1 extra?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Report the answer in 3 significant digits. Continue the calculation using 3+1 to minimize roundoff error and report the answer in 3 significant digits.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top