Significant Figures: Is My Way More Accurate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter M_LeComte
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Significant figures
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on discrepancies in calculations involving significant figures in physics problems. The author questions the accuracy of their method compared to their textbook, noting that their approach yields a slightly different result due to how significant figures are applied during intermediate steps. A key point raised is that the textbook author rounds values prematurely, which can lead to inaccuracies in final results. Participants agree that maintaining extra significant figures during calculations can minimize rounding errors, although the final answer's precision is ultimately limited by the least precise measurement. The conversation emphasizes the importance of careful handling of significant figures to achieve accurate results in physics calculations.
M_LeComte
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
The author of my physics book seems to be a little significant-figure-happy:
m=150.0, k=225, A=.15, t=3.00, δ=π
He does this : -A√k/m)sin(t√k/m)+δ)=-.15*1.22sin(3.00*1.22+π)=-.0907
Whereas I do: -A√k/m)sin(t√k/m)+δ)=-A√k/m)sin(3.67+π)=-A√k/m)sin(6.81)=-.0924

Isn't my way more accurate? These discrepancies are driving me nuts as they occur in almost every problem (and there is no method to his madness), so I just wanted to know.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
M_LeComte said:
The author of my physics book seems to be a little significant-figure-happy:
m=150.0, k=225, A=.15, t=3.00, ?=?
He does this : -A?k/m)sin(t?k/m)+?)=-.15*1.22sin(3.00*1.22+?)=-.0907
Whereas I do: -A?k/m)sin(t?k/m)+?)=-A?k/m)sin(3.67+?)=-A?k/m)sin(6.81)=-.0924

Isn't my way more accurate? These discrepancies are driving me nuts as they occur in almost every problem (and there is no method to his madness), so I just wanted to know.

How did (3.00*1.22) become 3.67? THis alone accounts for the discrepency.
 
Here is a hint:

3 * 1.22 is 3.66 not 3.67

Does that help?
 
t=3.00, k=225, m=150.0
√k/m)=1.22
and
1.22t=3.66
but
t√k/m)=3.67

And therein lies the problem. He's making a sig fig calculation before multiplying √k/m) by t. There's also a discrepancy in the ways we approach what's inside the sine function, thus exacerbating the already-present difference in our answers. To me, mine seems the more accurate way to do it, but I just wanted to make sure.
 
OK, I actually agree with you. When solving intermediate solutions it's a good idea to keep "sig plus one" figures to minimize rounding error. It doesn't matter too much here, since the final answer is limited to two sig figs due to the A = 0.15 factor. The discrepency is only .091 vs. .092 .
 
When solving the intermediate, you give correct number of sig fig, but then continuing the path to the final answer without having rounded at all.
 
I think that it is always best so solve equations algerbraically first, then plug and chug the numbers :smile:
 
'A' should actually be .150, so the difference between our answers is a bit bigger.

Thanks guys.
 
Back
Top