Significant Figures in Conversions: How to Apply the Rule in Physics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter future_vet
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Significant figures
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on applying significant figures in unit conversions related to physics. The user calculates the number of seconds and nanoseconds in a year, questioning the accuracy of their results. Corrections highlight that there are 3.15 x 10^16 nanoseconds in a year, emphasizing the importance of significant figures in calculations. It is noted that while conversion factors can be treated with more precision, the final answer should reflect the significant figures of the least precise measurement. Overall, understanding significant figures is crucial for accurate scientific calculations.
future_vet
Messages
169
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


This is probably a ridiculous question for many of you, but I want to make sure I have understood the significant figures rule. I am putting this in the physics section because it's from my physics book.

The Attempt at a Solution



a) Seconds in 1.00 year:
1 year x 365 x 24 x 60 x 60 = 31,536,000 seconds in a year = 3.15 x10^7 sec/y.

b) Nanoseconds in 1.00 year:
(Seconds in a year) x (nanoseconds in a second)= 31,536,000x1x10^-9 = 0.031536 = 3.15 x 10^-2 nanoseconds in a year.

c) Years in 1.00 seconds:
1.00seconds x (1 minute/60 seconds) x (1 hour / 60 minutes) x (1 day/ 24 hours) x (1 year/365 days) = 3.17x 10^-8 year in 1.00 seconds.

Would this be correct?

Thank you so much.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
a) and c) looks good.
b) How many nano seconds is there in 1 second?
Is there really 3.15 x 10^(-2) nanosseconds i a year :rolleyes:?
 
Would it be 31536000 x 1second/(1x10^-9)=3.15 x 10^16 ?

Thanks for pointing this out and for your help!
 
future_vet said:
Would it be 31536000 x 1second/(1x10^-9)=3.15 x 10^16 ?

Thanks for pointing this out and for your help!

Yea, that's correct.
 
If you want to be strict with sig figs, your answer should only have 2 because youre multiplying by 24 and 60 in your work. However, conversion factors like that can conveniently be extended to 24.0 hours/1.00 day and 60.0 minutes/1.00 hour. Its no big deal for conversions, but if a measurement has 2 sig figs, your answer is only accurate to 2 sig figs
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
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